We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
How are places such as Australia and New Zealand classified when differentiating geographic areas based on 'New World' and 'Old World?'
My understanding is:
- New World = North America + South America (+ Central America)
- Old World = Europe + Asia + Africa
This is biologically relevant via biogeography:
- Ex: neotropical vs. paleotropical (comparable to New and Old World Tropics)
I've seen online sources group Australia / New Zealand in both New and Old World (or in neither). So what's the right answer?
Reputably cited answers only please!
First off - this is an answer without citations. I looked for them, but couldn't find any. The terminology is undoubtedly described in reputable sources, but it is unlikely a paper is dedicated solely to explain this terminology, making literature searches tricky. Having said that -
I discussed this question with an anthropologist and she agrees with my idea that the terminology Old and New World is a historic and Euro-centric one, dating back to the colonial times when Europe viewed itself as the center of the world.
The Americas were discovered relatively early, around 1492. It was designated the New World. Australia wasn't found until around 1606. By that time the New World was already a century old and very likely already solidly associated with the Americas.
The New World, in a biological context, is often used to describe groups of closely related species found in the Americas and not elsewhere, such as New World monkeys. In certain areas of expertise the terminology is baked in in the jargon, .e.g, monkey and ape behavioral research areas. New World monkeys can be referred to by the Cebidae, as per the Linnaeus's classification. However, due to practical reasons geographical clustering of species can be more convenient.
The term New World means different things in a biological context or in the context of wines, for example (Americas versus Americas + Australia - admittedly Australian wines are pretty good).
In all, I think the terminology 'New and Old World' is confusing, rooted in historical considerations. Australia as well as Antarctica don't fit in this terminology.
There are two different approaches: general geography and biogeography.
In general geography, there's Old World, New World and everything else. On my websites, I recognize a third category - "Island Continents" - for Australia and Antarctica, even though they aren't recognized as islands. So we now have Old World, New World and Island Continents.
However, I believe most mainstream sources just include Australia with a region called Oceania and treat Antarctica as an island (or continent) unto itself.
In biology, the Americas are divided into two broad realms or ecozones - Nearctic (which includes most of North America) and Neotropic. The Old World is divided into three ecozones - Palearctic, Indo-Malaya and Afrotropic.
Australia is part of Australasia, an ecozone that includes some of the islands of southeastern Asia. (I believe Wallace's Line is generally recognized as the boundary between the Indo-Malayan and Australasian ecozones.)
I can't remember how biogeographers treat Antarctica. I think there are different schemes. I believe the entire Antarctic region (including sub-Antarctic islands) may sometimes be placed in its own ecozone, or Antarctica might just be lumped together with oceanic islands around the world.
Going back to plain vanilla geography, most islands in the Pacific Ocean can be grouped into one of three regions - Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia. The most notable group of islands in the Atlantic are the islands of the Caribbean, which are part of the New World. Biogeographers classify the Caribbean (along with the southern tip of Florida) as part of the Neotropic ecozone.
Difference Between Anthropoids and Prosimians
Being humans, we should be aware of our taxonomic relatives. According to the major taxonomic classifications, anthropoids and prosimians are the two major groups (Suborders: Anthropoidea and Prosimii) of the Order: Primates. The two suborders exhibit different characteristics in their anatomical and behavioural characteristics, but differences in the skull arrangement are prominent in keeping the prosimians and anthropoids apart. In recent classifications, however, the anthropoids are classified in the Infraorder: Simiiformes thus, the two groups of primates are most commonly known as simians and prosimians.
Anthropoids are also known as Simians and they are the most evolved and most intelligent among all animals lived to date. Anthropoids consist of three main primate groups known as New World Monkeys, Old World Monkeys, and Apes including humans. According to the fossil evidence, anthropoids have started to deviate from prosimians as New World Monkeys about 40 million years ago. The Old World species split from the rest of the primates around 25 million years from today. Anthropoids are large bodied primates with some species, such as Gorilla, being more than 200 kilograms in weight. In addition to the body weight and size, volume of the skull and size of the brain is very high in anthropoids compared to many other animals, as well. The New World Monkeys are known as Platyrrhines while Old World Monkeys and apes are known as Catarrhines. Platyrrhines have flat noses, their nostrils are pointed forward, and they can sit on their ankles. Catarrhines have narrow noses with downward pointed nostrils, and they sit on their rumps. Anthropoids are mostly herbivorous, but omnivorous species are not uncommon.
Prosimians are members of the Suborder: Prosimii. Loris and lemurs are the main present-day prosimians. However, prosimians do not belong to a certain clade, as they include some distinct species such as tarsiers, adapids (extinct), and omomyids (extinct). Hence, it is a paraphyletic group of primates. They were the firstly evolved primates and the only primates that are native to Madagascar. Their natural distribution has never reached the Americas instead, they have been distributed in Asia and Africa. They primarily depend on insects, and their sharp teeth are adaptations for their food habits. Their sharp teeth are specially arranged, which looks like a toothcomb. The snout of the prosimians is notably protruded, and their noses are wet. However, tarsiers neither do have wet noses nor tooth combs. The presence of grooming claws in prosimians is another important characteristic to notice. All of these animals are arboreal, and most are leaping while few species prefer to move very slowly through the branches of the trees. During daytime, prosimians prefer to keep hidden but active in the night.
What is the difference between Anthropoids and Prosimians?
• Anthropoids are a clade while prosimians are a paraphyletic group.
• Anthropoids are more evolved compared to prosimians.
• There are many more anthropoid species than the number of prosimian species.
• Anthropoids are either arboreal or terrestrial, while prosimians are always arboreal.
• Prosimians are nocturnal, but anthropoids could be active at any time of the day.
• Body size and brain capacity is much higher in anthropoids than in prosimians.
• Anthropoids are distributed everywhere in the world except Australia and Antarctica while prosimians are naturally found in Asia and Africa only.
• Snout is more protruded in prosimians compared to anthropoids.
• Anthropoids are omnivorous or herbivorous while prosimians are herbivorous only.
Intellectual Giants on Human Origins
I have conducted a lengthy comparative analysis of the Cayce material, the literature of Rudolph Steiner, the Rosicrucian’s, the Freemasons, the Theosophists, Plato, as well as worldwide indigenous oral traditions, myths and legends. What came forth was as unexpected as it was bizarre.
Virtually all the sources claim that Homo sapiens were created in supernatural fashion long ago on the lost continent of Atlantis, which once existed in the Atlantic Ocean. A continent that had as part of its population giants and little people. Long-lived androgynous creator gods sometimes described as possessing six fingers or toes, are claimed to have birthed humanity. Atlantis was claimed to have been eventually destroyed by a great flood roughly 12,000 years ago and survivors were said to have brought the arts of civilization to Egypt, the Americas and several other locations in its aftermath. Cayce reveals the following in reading 364-11:
“Please give a few details regarding the physiognomy, habits, customs and costumes of the people of Atlantis during the period just before the first destruction.” These took on many sizes as to the stature, from that as may be called the midget to the GIANTS – for there were GIANTS IN THE EARTH IN THOSE DAYS, men as tall as (what would be termed today) ten to twelve feet in stature, and well-proportioned throughout. (1)
Rudolph Steiner also had the following to say regarding these inhabitants of Atlantis, “Everything that refers to ‘giants’ in legends is absolutely based on knowledge of the truth . [W]e feel it to be absolutely correct, from the spiritual scientific point of view, that the giants are stupid and the dwarfs very clever.” (2) Secret society literature, oral traditions and religious documents like the Bible all proclaim the existence of ancient giants as well.
Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), founder of Steiner School system of education ( Public Domain )
Chapter 34 - Vertebrates
- After the evolution of the basic chordate body plan, the next major transition was the appearance of a head.
- Chordates with a head are known as craniates.
- The origin of a head—with a brain at the anterior end of the dorsal nerve cord, eyes and other sensory organs, and a skull—opened up a new way of feeding for chordates: active predation.
Living craniates have a set of derived characters.
- Living craniates share a set of derived characters that distinguishes them from other chordates.
- On the genetic level, they possess two clusters of Hox genes, while lancelets and chordates have only one.
- Other important families of genes that produce signaling molecules and transcription factors are also duplicated in craniates.
- This additional genetic complexity made a more complex morphology possible.
- Neural crest cells disperse through the body and contribute to the formation of various structures, such as teeth, some of the bones and cartilages of the skull, the dermis of the face, several types of neurons, and the sensory capsules of the eyes and other sense organs.
- The vertebrate cranium and brain (the enlarged anterior end of the dorsal, hollow nerve cord) and the anterior sensory organs are evidence of a high degree of cephalization, the concentration of sensory and neural equipment in the head.
- Unlike the pharyngeal slits of lancelets, which are used primarily for suspension feeding, gill slits are associated with muscles and nerves that allow water to be pumped through the slits.
- This pumping sucks in food and facilitates gas exchange.
Cambrian fossils provide clues to craniate origins.
- Several recent fossil finds in China of early chordates have provided information about the origin of craniates.
- They appear to be “missing links” that straddle the transition to craniates.
- The most primitive of these fossils is a 3-cm-long animal called Haikouella.
- This animal resembles a lancelet and was probably a suspension feeder.
- Haikouella also had a small but well-formed brain, eyes, and muscular segments.
- It also had hardened structures (“denticles”) in the pharynx that may have functioned somewhat like teeth.
- However, Haikouella did not have a skull.
- Haikouichthys had a skull composed of cartilage and is the oldest known true craniate.
Class Myxini: Hagfishes are the least derived craniate lineage.
- Hagfishes have a skull of cartilage but lack jaws and vertebrae.
- They swim in a snakelike fashion by using their segmental muscles to exert force against their notochord, which they retain in adulthood as a strong, flexible rod of cartilage.
- They have toothlike formations made of keratin.
- Rows of slime glands along a hagfish’s body produce small amounts of slime perhaps to repulse other scavengers or larger amounts to deter a potential predator.
- The taxonomic term fish refers only to a specific clade of vertebrates, the actinopterygians.
Concept 34.3 Vertebrates are craniates that have a backbone
- During the Cambrian period, a lineage of craniates evolved into vertebrates.
- With a more complex nervous system and a more elaborate skeleton, vertebrates became active predators.
- After vertebrates branched off from other craniates, they underwent another genetic duplication, this one involving a group of transcription factor genes called the Dlx family.
- This additional genetic complexity was associated with innovations in vertebrate nervous systems and skeletons, including a more extensive skull and a backbone composed of vertebrae.
- In the majority of vertebrates, the vertebrae enclose the spinal cord and have taken over the biomechanical roles of the notochord.
- Aquatic vertebrates also have a number of adaptations associated with faster swimming, including fins stiffened by fin rays and a more efficient gas exchange system in the gills.
Class Cephalaspidomorphi: Lampreys are the oldest living lineage of vertebrates.
- Like hagfishes, lampreys offer clues to early chordate evolution but also have acquired unique characters.
- There are about 35 species of lampreys inhabiting both marine and freshwater environments.
- Most lampreys are parasites that feed by clamping a round, jawless mouth onto a fish.
- They use their rasping tongues to penetrate the skin of their fish prey and to ingest the prey’s blood.
- These larvae resemble lancelets and live partially buried in sediment.
- After metamorphosis, these lampreys attain sexual maturity, reproduce, and die within a few days.
- Unlike most vertebrate cartilage, lamprey cartilage contains no collagen. Instead, it is a stiff protein matrix.
- Lampreys also have a cartilaginous pipe surrounding the rodlike notochord.
- Pairs of cartilaginous projections extend dorsally, partially enclosing the nerve cord with what might be a vestige of an early-stage vertebral column.
Many vertebrate lineages emerged early.
- Conodonts were slender, soft-bodied vertebrates with prominent eyes.
- At the anterior end of their mouth, they had a set of barbed hooks made of mineralized dental tissue.
- They probably hunted with their large eyes and impaled their prey on hooks.
- The food then passed to the pharynx, where a different set of dental elements crushed and sliced it.
- These vertebrates had paired fins and an inner ear with two semicircular canals that provided a sense of balance.
- Its mineralization began only after lampreys diverged from other vertebrates.
- Mineralization may have been associated with the transition to new feeding mechanisms.
- Only in more derived vertebrates did the endoskeleton begin to mineralize, starting with the skull.
Concept 34.4 Gnathostomes are vertebrates that have jaws
- The gnathostomes have true jaws, hinged structures that enable vertebrates to grasp food firmly.
- According to one hypothesis, gnathostome jaws evolved by modification of the skeletal rods that had previously supported the anterior pharyngeal gill slits.
- The remaining gill slits were no longer required for suspension feeding and remained as the major sites of respiratory gas exchange.
Gnathostomes have a number of shared, derived characters.
- Gnathostomes share other derived characters besides jaws.
- The common ancestors of all gnathostomes underwent an additional duplication of the Hox genes, so that the single cluster present in early chordates became four.
- Other gene clusters also duplicated, allowing further complexity in the development of gnathostome embryos.
- Jaws, with the help of teeth, enable the animal to grip food items firmly and slice them up.
- Paired fins, along with the tail, enable fishes to maneuver accurately while swimming.
- Most placoderms were less than a meter long, although some giants were more than 10 m long.
Class Chondrichthyes: Sharks and rays have cartilaginous skeletons.
- The class Chondrichthyes, sharks and their relatives, includes some of the biggest and most successful vertebrate predators in the oceans.
- Chondrichthyes have relatively flexible endoskeletons of cartilage rather than bone.
- In most species, parts of the skeleton are impregnated by calcium.
- Traces of bone can be found in living chondrichthyes, in their scales, at the base of their teeth and (in some sharks) in a thin layer on the surface of their vertebrae.
- The loss of bone in chondrichthyes is a derived condition, which emerged after they diverged from other gnathostomes.
- All have well-developed jaws and paired fins.
- Powerful axial muscles power undulations of the body and caudal fin to drive the fish forward.
- The dorsal fins provide stabilization.
- While some buoyancy is provided by low-density oils in the large liver, the flow of water over the pectoral and pelvic fins also provides lift to keep the animal suspended in the water column.
- Some sharks and many skates and rays spend much time resting on the seafloor, using the muscles of their jaws and pharynx to pump water over the gills.
- In contrast, the largest sharks and rays are suspension feeders that consume plankton.
- Sharks have several rows of teeth that gradually move to the front of the mouth as old teeth are lost.
- Within the intestine of a shark is a spiral valve, a corkscrew-shaped ridge that increases surface area and prolongs the passage of food along the short digestive tract.
- Sharks have sharp vision but cannot distinguish colors.
- Their acute olfactory sense (smelling) occurs in a pair of nostrils that do not function in breathing.
- Sharks can detect electrical fields, including those generated by the muscle contractions of nearby prey, through patches of specialized skin pores.
- The lateral line system, a row of microscopic organs sensitive to pressure changes, can detect low-frequency vibrations.
- In sharks, the whole body transmits sound to the hearing organs of the inner ear.
- Males transfer sperm via claspers on their pelvic fins to the reproductive tract of the female.
- Oviparous sharks encase their eggs in protective cases and lay them outside the mother’s body.
- These hatch months later as juveniles.
- The embryo completes development in the uterus, nourished by the egg yolk.
- Most rays are flattened bottom dwellers that crush molluscs and crustaceans in their jaws.
- The enlarged pectoral fins of rays are used like wings to propel the animal through the water.
- The tail of many rays is whiplike and may bear venomous barbs for defense against threats.
- They are severely threatened by overfishing.
- In 2003, researchers reported that shark stocks in the northwest Atlantic declined 75% in 15 years.
Osteichthyes: The extant classes of bony fishes are the ray-finned fishes, the lobe-finned fishes, and the lungfishes.
- The vast majority of bony fishes belong to a clade of gnathostomes called the Osteichthyes (meaning “bony fish”).
- Systematists today include tetrapods with bony fish in Osteichthyes, which otherwise would be paraphyletic.
- Nearly all bony fishes have an ossified endoskeleton with a hard matrix of calcium phosphate.
- It is not clear when the shift to a bony skeleton took place during gnathostome evolution.
- Water is drawn into the mouth, through the pharynx, and out between the gills by movements of the operculum and muscles surrounding the gill chambers.
- The positive buoyancy provided by air counters the negative buoyancy of the tissues, enabling many fishes to be neutrally buoyant and remain suspended in the water.
- The swim bladder evolved from balloonlike lungs that may have been used to breathe air when dissolved oxygen levels were low in stagnant shallow waters.
- Most species are oviparous, reproducing by external fertilization after the female sheds large numbers of small eggs.
- Internal fertilization and birthing characterize other species.
- This class includes bass, trout, perch, tuna, and herring.
- In this group, the fins are supported by long, flexible rays.
- The fins may be modified for maneuvering, defense, and other functions.
- Many species of ray-finned fishes returned to fresh water at some point in their evolution.
- Some ray-finned fishes, such as salmon, make a round-trip from fresh water to seawater and back to fresh water during their life cycle.
- Many Devonian lobe-fins were large, bottom dwellers that may have used their paired, muscular fins to “walk” along the bottom.
- By the end of the Devonian period, lobe-fin diversity was dwindling.
- One lineage, the coelacanths (class Actinistia) probably originated as freshwater animals with lungs, but others shifted to the ocean, including the only living genus, Latimeria.
- The second lineage of living lobe-fins is represented by three genera of lungfishes (class Dipnoi), which live today in the Southern Hemisphere.
- They generally inhabit stagnant ponds and swamps.
- They can gulp air into lungs connected to the pharynx of the digestive tract to provide oxygen for metabolism.
- Lungfishes also have gills, which are the main organs for gas exchange in Australian lungfishes.
- When ponds shrink during the dry season, some lungfishes can burrow into the mud and estivate.
Concept 34.5 Tetrapods are gnathostomes that have limbs and feet
- One of the most significant events in vertebrate history took place 360 million years ago, when the fins of some lobe-fins evolved into tetrapod limbs and feet.
- The most significant character of tetrapods is the four limbs, which allow them to support their weight on land.
- The feet of tetrapods have digits that allow them to transmit muscle-generated forces to the ground when they walk.
- The ears are adapted to the detection of airborne sounds.
- At the water’s edge, leglike appendages were probably better equipment than fins for paddling and crawling through the dense vegetation in shallow water.
- The tetrapod body plan was thus a modification of a preexisting body plan.
- For example, fossils of Acanthostega from 365 million years ago had bony gill supports and rays in its tail to support propulsion in water, but it also had fully formed legs, ankles, and digits.
- Acanthostega is representative of a period of vertebrate evolution when adaptations for shallow water allowed certain fishes to make a gradual transition to the terrestrial side of the water’s edge.
- Judging from the morphology and location of the fossils, most of these early tetrapods remained tied to water.
Class Amphibia: Salamanders, frogs, and caecilians are the three extant amphibian orders.
- Today the amphibians (class Amphibia) are represented by about 4,800 species of salamanders (order Urodela, “tailed ones”), frogs (order Anura, “tail-less ones”), and caecilians (order Apoda, “legless ones”).
- Some of the 500 species of urodeles are entirely aquatic, but others live on land as adults or throughout life.
- On land, most salamanders walk with a side-to-side bending of the body that may resemble the swagger of the early terrestrial tetrapods.
- Adult frogs use powerful legs to hop along the terrain.
- Frogs nab insects by flicking out their sticky tongues, which are attached to the front of the mouth.
- Many poisonous species are brightly colored, perhaps to warn predators who associate the coloration with danger.
- The reduction of legs evolved secondarily from a legged ancestor.
- A few South American species live in freshwater ponds and streams.
- Tadpoles are usually aquatic herbivores with gills and a lateral line system, and they swim by undulating their tails.
- During metamorphosis, the tadpole develops legs, the lateral line disappears, and lungs replace gills.
- Adult frogs are carnivorous hunters.
- There are some strictly aquatic, and some strictly terrestrial frogs, salamanders, and caecilians.
- The larvae of salamanders and caecilians look like adults and are also carnivorous.
- For example, the mudpuppy (Necturus) retains gills and other larval features when sexually mature.
- Those adapted to drier habitats spend much of their time in burrows or under moist leaves where the humidity is higher.
- Most amphibians rely heavily on their moist skin to carry out gas exchange with the environment.
- Some terrestrial species lack lungs entirely and breathe exclusively through their skin and oral cavity.
- Most species have external fertilization, with eggs shed in ponds or swamps or at least in moist environments.
- Some species lay vast numbers of eggs in temporary pools where mortality is high.
- Others display various types of parental care and lay relatively few eggs.
- In some species, males or females may house eggs on the back, in the mouth, or even in the stomach.
- Some species are ovoviviparous or viviparous, retaining the developing eggs in the female reproductive tract until released as juveniles.
- Then many male frogs fill the air with their mating calls as they defend breeding territories or attract females.
- In some terrestrial species, migrations to specific breeding sites may involve vocal communication, celestial navigation, or chemical signaling.
- Acid precipitation is damaging to amphibians because of their dependence on wet places for completion of their life cycles.
Concept 34.6 Amniotes are tetrapods that have a terrestrially adapted egg
- The amniote clade consists of the mammals and reptiles (including birds).
- The evolution of amniotes from an amphibian ancestor involved many adaptations for terrestrial living.
- The amniotic egg is the major derived character of the clade.
- Inside the shell of the amniotic egg are several extraembryonic membranes that function in gas exchange, waste storage, and the transfer of stored nutrients to the embryo.
- The amniotic egg is named for one of these membranes, the amnion, which encloses a fluid-filled “private pond” that bathes the embryo and acts as a hydraulic shock absorber.
- In contrast to the shell-less eggs of amphibians, the amniotic eggs of most amniotes have a shell that retains water and can be laid in a dry place.
- The calcareous shells of bird eggs are inflexible, while the leathery eggs of many reptiles are flexible.
- Most mammals have dispensed with the shell.
- The embryo implants in the wall of the uterus and obtains its nutrition from the mother.
- No fossils of amniotic eggs have been found from that time.
The reptile clade includes birds.
- The reptile clade includes tuatara, lizards, snakes, turtles, crocodilians, and birds, as well as extinct groups such as dinosaurs.
- Reptiles have several adaptations for terrestrial life not generally found in amphibians.
- Scales containing the protein keratin waterproof the skin, preventing dehydration in dry air.
- Crocodiles, which are adapted to water, have evolved more permeable scales called scutes.
- As an exception, many turtles can use the moist surfaces of their cloaca for gas exchange.
- Fertilization occurs internally, before the shell is secreted as the egg passes through the female’s reproductive tract.
- Some species of lizards and snakes are viviparous, with their extraembryonic membranes forming a placenta that enables the embryo to obtain nutrients from its mother.
- However, many nonbird reptiles regulate their body temperature behaviorally by basking in the sun when cool and seeking shade when hot.
- One advantage of this strategy is that an ectothermic reptile can survive on less than 10% of the calories required by a mammal of equivalent size.
- Birds are endothermic, capable of keeping the body warm through metabolism.
- Some parareptiles had dermal plates on their skin, which may have provided defense against predators.
- The most obvious derived character of diapsids is a pair of holes on each side of the skull, behind the eye socket.
- One, the lepidosaurs, includes lizards, snakes, and tuataras.
- This lineage also produced a number of marine reptiles including plesiosaurs and ichthyosaurs.
- The pterosaur wing is formed from a bristle-covered membrane of skin that stretched between the hind leg and the tip of an elongated finger.
- Well-preserved fossils show the presence of muscles, blood vessels, and nerves in the wing membrane, suggesting that pterosaurs could dynamically adjust their membranes to assist their flight.
- There were two main dinosaur lineages: the ornithischians, which were mostly herbivorous, and the saurischians, which included both long-necked giant herbivores and bipedal carnivorous theropods.
- Theropods included the famous Tyrannosaurus rex as well as the ancestors of birds.
- Paleontologists have discovered signs of parental care among dinosaurs.
- Some experts are skeptical.
- In the warm, consistent Mesozoic climate, behavioral adaptations may have been sufficient for maintaining a suitable body temperature for terrestrial dinosaurs.
- Also, the low surface-to-volume ratios would have reduced the effects of daily fluctuations in air temperature on the animal’s internal temperature.
- Some anatomical evidence supports the hypothesis that at least some dinosaurs were endotherms.
- Paleontologists have found fossils of dinosaurs in both Antarctica and the Arctic, although the climate in those areas was milder during the Mesozoic than today.
- It is uncertain whether dinosaurs were declining before they were finished off by an asteroid or comet impact.
- Tuatara relatives lived at least 220 million years ago, when they thrived on every continent well into the Cretaceous period.
- Most are relatively small, but they range in length from 16 mm to 3 m.
- However, recently discovered fossils of aquatic snakes with complete hind legs suggest that snakes likely evolved in water and then recolonized land.
- Some species of snakes retain vestigial pelvic and limb bones, providing evidence of their ancestry.
- Snakes have acute chemical sensors and are sensitive to ground vibrations.
- The flicking tongue fans odors toward olfactory organs on the roof of the mouth.
- The origin of the turtle shell remains a puzzle.
- Some paleontologists suggest that turtle shells evolved from the dermal shells of parareptiles.
- They spend most of their time in water, breathing air through upturned nostrils.
- Crocodilians are confined to the tropics and subtropics.
Birds evolved as feathered dinosaurs.
- Like crocodilians, birds are archosaurs, but highly specialized for flight.
- In addition to amniotic eggs and scales, modern birds have feathers and other distinctive flight equipment.
- One adaptation to reduce weight is the absence of some organs.
- For instance, females have only one ovary.
- The bones are air-filled and honeycombed to reduce weight without sacrificing much strength.
- Feathers are made of beta-keratin, a protein similar to the keratin of reptile scales.
- Flight enhances hunting and scavenging.
- It enables many birds to exploit flying insects, an abundant, highly nutritious food resource.
- Birds are endothermic, using their own metabolic heat to maintain a constant body temperature.
- Feathers and, in some species, a layer of fat provide insulation.
- The lungs have tiny tubes leading to and from elastic air sacs that help dissipate heat and reduce body density.
- The large brains of birds (proportionately larger than those of reptiles or amphibians) support very complex behavior.
- This culminates in copulation, contact between the mates’ vents, the openings to their cloacae.
- After eggs are laid, the avian embryo is kept warm through brooding by the mother, father, or both, depending on the species.
- These fossils suggest that feathers evolved long before feathered flight, possibly for insulation or courtship.
- Small ground-running dinosaurs chasing prey or evading predation may have used feathers to gain extra lift as they jumped into the air.
- Dinosaurs could have glided from trees, aided by feathers.
- This ancient bird lived about 150 million years ago, during the late Jurassic period.
- Archaeopteryx had clawed forelimbs, teeth, and a long tail containing vertebrae.
- Without its feathers, Archaeopteryx would probably be classified as a theropod dinosaur.
- Its skeletal anatomy indicates that it was a weak flyer, perhaps a tree-dwelling glider.
- The ratites include the ostrich, kiwi, and emu.
- They have powerful pectoral muscles, which they use in swimming.
- The beak of birds is very adaptable, taking on a great variety of shapes for different diets.
Concept 34.7 Mammals are amniotes that have hair and produce milk
Mammals diversified extensively in the wake of the Cretaceous extinctions.
- Mammals have a number of derived traits.
- All mammalian mothers use mammary glands to nourish their babies with milk, a balanced diet rich in fats, sugars, proteins, minerals, and vitamins.
- All mammals also have hair, made of keratin.
- Hair and a layer of fat under the skin retain metabolic heat, contributing to endothermy in mammals.
- Adaptations include a muscular diaphragm and a four-chambered heart.
- Many species are capable of learning.
- The relatively long period of parental care extends the time for offspring to learn important survival skills by observing their parents.
- Unlike the uniform conical teeth of most reptiles, the teeth of mammals come in a variety of shapes and sizes adapted for processing many kinds of foods.
- During the evolution of mammals from reptiles, two bones formerly in the jaw joint were incorporated into the mammalian ear and the jaw joint was remodeled.
- Synapsids have a temporal fenestra behind the eye socket on each side of the skull.
- These animals were not mammals, but they were small and likely hairy, fed on insects at night, and had a higher metabolism that other synapsids.
- They likely laid eggs.
- Early mammals diversified into a number of lineages, all about the size of a shrew.
- Modern mammals are split into three groups: monotremes (egg-laying mammals), marsupials (mammals with pouches), and eutherian (placental) mammals.
- The reptile-like egg contains enough yolk to nourish the developing embryo.
- After hatching, the baby sucks milk from the mother’s fur because she lacks nipples.
- In most species, the tiny offspring climbs from the exit of the female’s reproductive tract to the mother’s pouch.
- In Australia, marsupials have radiated and filled niches occupied by eutherian mammals in other parts of the world.
- Through convergent evolution, these diverse marsupials resemble eutherian mammals that occupy similar ecological roles.
- Australia’s isolation facilitated the diversification and survival of its marsupial fauna.
- Invasions of placental mammals from North America impacted the marsupial fauna of South America about 12 million years ago and then again about 3 million years ago when the continents were connected by the Isthmus of Panama.
- This mammalian biogeography is an example of the interplay between biological and geological evolution.
- Young eutherians complete their embryonic development within the uterus, joined to the mother by the placenta.
- Eutherians are commonly called placental mammals because their placentas are more complex than those of marsupials and provide a more intimate and long-lasting association between mother and young.
Concept 34.8 Humans are bipedal hominoids with a large brain
Primate evolution provides a context for understanding human origins.
- Primates include lemurs, monkeys, and apes.
- Primates have large brains and short jaws.
- Their eyes are forward-looking.
- Most primates have hands and feet adapted for grasping.
- Relative to other mammals, they have large brains and short jaws.
- They have flat nails on their digits, rather than narrow claws.
- Primates also have relatively well-developed parental care and relatively complex social behavior.
- The earliest primates were probably tree dwellers, shaped by natural selection for arboreal life.
- The grasping hands and feet of primates are adaptations for hanging on to tree branches.
- All modern primates, except Homo, have a big toe that is widely separated from the other toes.
- The thumb is relatively mobile and separate from the fingers in all primates, but a fully opposable thumb is found only in anthropoid primates.
- The unique dexterity of humans, aided by distinctive bone structure at the thumb base, represents descent with modification from ancestral hands adapted for life in the trees.
- The overlapping fields of vision of the two eyes enhance depth perception, an obvious advantage when brachiating.
- Excellent hand-eye coordination is also important for arboreal maneuvering.
- The Prosimii (prosimians) probably resemble early arboreal primates and include the lemurs of Madagascar and the lorises, pottos, and tarsiers of tropical Africa and southern Asia.
- The Anthropoidea (anthropoids) include monkeys, apes, and humans.
- The Old World and New World monkeys underwent separate adaptive radiations.
- All New World monkeys are arboreal, but Old World monkeys include arboreal and ground-dwelling species.
- Most monkeys in both groups are diurnal, and usually live in bands held together by social behavior.
- Modern apes are confined exclusively to the tropical regions of the Old World.
- They evolved from Old World monkeys about 20–25 million years ago.
- Only gibbons and orangutans are primarily arboreal.
- Apes have relatively larger brains than monkeys, and their behavior is more flexible.
Humans are bipedal hominoids.
- In the continuity of life spanning more than 3.5 billion years, humans and apes have shared ancestry for all but the past few million years.
- Human evolution is marked by the evolution of several major features.
- Humans stand upright and walk on two legs.
- Humans have a much larger brain than other hominoids and are capable of language, symbolic thought, and tool use.
- Humans have reduced jawbones and muscles and a shorter digestive tract.
- Human and chimpanzee genomes are 99% identical.
- Scientists are comparing the genomes of humans and chimpanzees to investigate the 1% difference.
- These species are known as hominids.
- Sahelanthropus and other early hominids shared some of the derived characters of humans.
- They had reduced canine teeth and relatively flat faces.
- They were more upright and bipedal than other hominoids.
- Early hominids were small in stature, with relatively large teeth and a protruding lower jaw.
- First, our ancestors were not chimpanzees or any other modern apes.
- Chimpanzees and humans represent two divergent branches of the hominoid tree that evolved from a common ancestor that was neither a chimpanzee nor a human.
- Second, human evolution did not occur as a ladder with a series of steps leading directly from an ancestral hominoid to Homo sapiens.
- If human evolution is a parade, then many splinter groups traveled down dead ends, and several different human species coexisted.
- Human phylogeny is more like a multibranched bush with our species as the tip of the only surviving twig.
- Third, the various human characteristics, such as upright posture and an enlarged brain, did not evolve in unison.
- Different features evolved at different rates, called mosaic evolution.
- Our pedigree includes ancestors who walked upright but had brains much less developed than ours.
- The first australopith, A. africanus, was discovered in 1924 by Raymond Dart in a quarry in South Africa.
- From this and other skeletons, it became clear that A. africanus probably walked fully erect and had humanlike hands and teeth.
- However, the brain was only about one-third the size of a modern human’s brain.
- This fossil, nicknamed “Lucy,” was described as a new species, A. afarensis.
- However, the pelvis and skull bones and fossil tracks showed that A. afarensis walked bipedally.
- Two lineages appeared after A. afarensis: the “robust” australopithecines with sturdy skulls and powerful jaws and teeth for grinding and chewing hard, tough foods and the “gracile” australopithecines with lighter feeding equipment adapted for softer foods.
- Our anthropoid ancestors of 30–35 million years ago were tree dwelling.
- Twenty million years ago, the forests contracted as the climate became drier.
- The result was an increased savanna with few trees.
- For decades, paleontologists thought that bipedalism was an adaptation to life on the savanna.
- When and why did tool use arise in the human lineage?
- Other hominoids are capable of sophisticated tool use.
- Orangutans can fashion probes from sticks for retrieving insects from their nests.
- Chimps use rocks to smash open food and put leaves on their feet to walk over thorns.
- The australopith fossils near the site had relatively small brains.
- Perhaps tool use originated before large hominid brains evolved.
- These fossils range in age from 2.4 to 1.6 million years old.
- This species had less prognathic jaws and larger brains (about 600–750 cm3) than australopiths.
- In some cases, anthropologists have found sharp stone tools with these fossils, indicating that some hominids had started to use their brains and hands to fashion tools.
- H. ergaster had a larger brain than Homo habilis, as well as long slender legs well adapted for long-distance walking.
- This species lived in more-arid environments and was associated with more-sophisticated tool use.
- Its reduced teeth suggest that it might have been able to cook or mash its food before eating it.
- Sexual dimorphism is reduced in pair-bonding species.
- Male and female Homo ergaster may have engaged in more pair-bonding than earlier hominids, perhaps in order to provide long-term biparental care of babies.
- They lived from about 1.8 million to 500,000 years ago.
- Fossils from Asia are known by such names as “Beijing man” and “Java Man.”
- In Europe, Neanderthals arose from an earlier species, Homo heidelbergensis, which arose in Africa about 600,000 years ago and spread to Europe.
- Fossilized skulls indicate that Neanderthals had brains as large as ours, though somewhat different in shape.
- They made hunting tools from stone and wood.
- Neanderthals were generally more heavily built than modern humans.
- Scientists have extracted DNA from four fossil Neanderthals living at different times and places in Europe.
- All Neanderthals formed a clade, while modern Europeans were more closely related to modern Africans and Asians.
- These early humans were slender and lacked brow ridges.
- This is supported by analysis of mDNA and Y chromosomes of various populations.
- Neanderthals produced sophisticated tools, but had little creativity or capacity for symbolic thought.
- Comparisons of flanking regions of the gene suggest that most changes took place within the past 200,000 years.
- The evolutionary change in FOXP2 may be the first genetic clue about how our own species came to be.
Lecture Outline for Campbell/Reece Biology, 7th Edition, © Pearson Education, Inc. 34-1
What do they need from me?
We are the facilitators of formative activities that help increase our students’ metacognition helping them to know what they don’t know, and how to acquire the unknown information so they can apply it when required (tested). While formative activities will vary widely, their purpose remains the same.
These classroom techniques are meant for student learning, not assessing mastery by the instructor. I like to ask myself when selecting formative activities, “Is this something I can get out of the way of my students’ learning and let them be the captains of their own ship?”
Low stakes assessment of student progress includes activities that encourage students to reflect, collaborate, teach others, review, apply, or create. Incentivizing with points is vital for full participation. However, exams designed in anxiety producing high stakes testing environments seldom produce the long-term retention that incremental low stakes self-assessments do.
Consider formative activities such as group projects, encourage collaboration through discussion forums, offer opportunities for reflection through journaling, or ask opened ended questions on short, low-stakes quizzes.
The spread of people to Australia
Click to enlarge image Toggle Caption
Origins of the First Australians
The viewpoints about the origins of these peoples was once entangled with the wider debate regarding the origins of all modern humans. During the 1980s and 1990s, the two main viewpoints were the ‘Out of Africa’ and ‘Multiregional’ models. However, new fossils and improved DNA research have resulted in these models becoming obsolete. The broad consensus now is that all modern humans are descended from an African population of Homo sapiens that migrated around the world but bred with local archaic populations as they did so.
There is some debate about the role that this interbreeding had in modern human origins. The ‘Recent African Origin’ model states that modern human traits merged in Africa and while interbreeding occurred during migrations around the world, these had only minimal impacts on genetic traits of modern humans. The ‘Assimilation’ model places greater emphasis on inter breeding, claiming that some Homo sapiens traits evolved in Africa, but many new traits evolved through interbreeding with other archaic populations outside of Africa.
‘Out of Africa’ stated that the first humans to colonise Australia came from a recent migration of Homo sapiens through South-east Asia. These people belonged to a single genetic lineage and were the descendants of a population that originated in Africa. The fossil evidence for the earliest Indigenous Australians does show a range of physical variation that would be expected in a single, geographically widespread population.
‘Multiregional’ proponents interpreted the variation found in the fossil record of early Indigenous Australians as evidence that Australia was colonised by two separate genetic lineages of modern humans. One lineage was believed to have been the evolutionary descendants of Indonesian Homo erectus while the other lineage had evolved from Chinese Homo erectus. Modern Aboriginal people are the result of the assimilation of these two genetic lineages.
The Asian Connection
Modern humans had reached Asia by 70,000 years ago before moving down through South-east Asia and into Australia. However, Homo sapiens were not the first people to inhabit this region. Homo erectus had already been in Asia for at least 1.5 million years. It is possible that these two species may have coexisted, as some dates for Indonesian Homo erectus suggest they may have survived there until as recently as 50,000 years ago. Homo erectus remains have never been found in Australia.
A second species, the Denisovans, was also know to inhabit this region and evidence shows they interbred with modern humans. Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians carry about 3-5 % of Denisovan DNA. This is explained by interbreeding of eastern Eurasian Denisovans with the modern human ancestors of these populations as they migrated towards Australia and Papua New Guinea.
Key fossil finds from Asia include
- ‘Solo Man’ - Homo erectus discovered in Ngangdong, Indonesia. ‘Solo Man’ shares similarities with earlier Homo erectus specimens from Sangiran and is considered to be a late Homo erectus. Its age is uncertain and, because its exact original location is unknown, published dates have ranged from 50,000 to 500,000 years old. If the younger age is correct, then it is possible that Homo erectus may have shared this region with Homo sapiens.
- ‘Wadjak’ - Homo sapiens discovered in 1889, Java, Indonesia. The age is between 8000 - 20,000 years old.
Originally, this skull was thought to be about 50,000 years old and attempts were made to link this skull with the arrival of the first Australians. However, dating methods have been unable to determine exactly how old it is. It is now thought to be probably less than 20,000 years old.
- Zhoukoudian Upper Cave 101 - Homo sapiens discovered in 1933 in Zhoukoudian, China. Age is 10,000 - 25,000 years old.
Stay in the know
Uncover the secrets of the Australian Museum with our monthly emails.
Gateways into a new continent
There has always been an ocean separating Asia and Australia. At times this distance was reduced but the earliest travellers still had to navigate across large stretches of water.
For much of its history Australia was joined to New Guinea, forming a landmass called Sahul. These countries were finally separated by rising sea levels about 8,000 years ago. Genetic evidence supports the close ties between these two countries – the Indigenous peoples from these regions are more closely related to each other than to anyone else in the world, suggesting a recent common ancestry.
There are a number of likely paths of migration across Asia and into Sahul. These are based on the shortest possible route and take into consideration the land bridges that would appear during times of low sea levels. However, travel may have also occurred when sea levels were high. High sea levels would have reduced the amount of usable land and increased the population pressure. During these times it may have been necessary to expand into new areas.
Changing sea levels
Changing sea levels have significantly affected the geography of South-east Asia and Australia and the migration patterns of prehistoric peoples. During times of low sea levels the travelling distance between Timor and Sahul would have been reduced to about 90 kilometres.
Present sea levels are higher than they have been for most of the last million years. When water is locked up in the polar ice caps (known as an Ice Age) the sea level drops. When the climate becomes warmer, the ice melts and the sea level rises again.
The original seafarers
The settlement of Australia is the first unequivocal evidence of a major sea crossing and rates as one of the greatest achievements of early humans. However the motive and circumstances regarding the arrival of the first Australians is a matter for conjecture. It may have been a deliberate attempt to colonise new territory or an accident after being caught in monsoon winds.
The lack of preservation of any ancient boat means archaeologists will probably never know what kind of craft was used for the journey. None of the boats used by Aboriginal people in ancient times are suitable for major voyages. The most likely suggestion has been rafts made of bamboo, a material common in Asia.
The early occupation of Australia
The earliest accepted dates for human occupation of Australia come from sites in the Northern Territory. The Madjedbebe (previously called Malakunanja II) rock shelter in Arnhem Land has been dated to around 65,000 years old (Nature, 2017).
Over the last few decades, a significant number of archaeological sites dated at more than 30,000 years old have been discovered. By this time all of Australia, including the arid centre and Tasmania, was occupied. The drowning of many coastal sites by rising sea levels has destroyed what would have been the earliest occupation sites.
Recently published dates of 120,000 years ago for the site of Moyjil in Warrnambool, Victoria, offer intriguing possibilities of much earlier occupation (Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, 2018). The site contains remains of shellfish, crabs and fish in what may be a ‘midden’, but definitive proof of human occupation is lacking and investigations are ongoing.
The First Australians
Much of our knowledge about the earliest people in Australia comes from archaeology. The physical remains of human activity that have survived in the archaeological record are largely stone tools, rock art and ochre, shell middens and charcoal deposits and human skeletal remains. These all provide information on the tremendous length and complexity of Australian Aboriginal culture.
The oldest human fossil remains found in Australia date to around 40,000 years ago – 20,000 years after the earliest archaeological evidence of human occupation. Nothing is known about the physical appearance of the first humans that entered the continent over 60,000 years ago. What is clear is that Aboriginal people living in Australia between 40,000 and 10,000 years ago had much larger bodies and more robust skeletons than they do today and showed a wide range of physical variation.
Stone tools in Australia, as in other parts of the world, changed and developed through time. Some early types, such as wasted blades, core tools, large flake scrapers and split pebble choppers continue to be made and used right up to today.
About 6000 years ago, new and specialised tools such as points, backed blades and thumbnail scrapers became common. Significant variation between the tool kits of different regions also appeared. Prototypes for this technology appeared earlier in Asia, suggesting this innovation was introduced into Australia.
The ground stone technique produces tools with a more durable and even edge, although not as sharp as a chipped tool. The oldest ground stone tools appear in Australia about 10,000 years before they appear in Europe, suggesting that early Australians were more technologically advanced in some of their tool manufacturing techniques than was traditionally thought.
Rock art, including painted and carved forms, plays a significant role in Aboriginal culture and has survived in the archaeological record for over 30,000 years. In age and abundance Australian Aboriginal rock art is comparable to world-renowned European cave sites such as those at Lascaux in France and Altamira in Spain.
It is probable that rock art was part of the culture of the first Australians. Its exact purpose is unknown but it is likely that from the earliest times rock art would have formed part of religious ritual activity, as is common in modern hunter-gatherer societies.
Ochre and mineral pigments
Mineral pigments, such as ochre, provide the oldest evidence for human arrival in Australia. Used pigments have been found in the earliest occupation levels of many sites, with some pieces dated at about 55,000 years old. This suggests that art was practised from the beginning of colonisation. Natural pigments were probably used for a range of purposes including burials, cave painting, decoration of objects and body art. Such usage still occurs today.
Ochre is an iron oxide found in a range of colours from yellow to red and brown. Red ochre is particularly important in many desert cultures due to the belief that it represents the blood of ancestral beings and can provide protection and strength. Ochre is used by grinding it into a powder and mixing it with a fluid, such as water, blood or saliva.
Archaeological evidence for living sites of Ancient Aboriginal peoples comes in a variety of forms including fishing traps and weirs, stone-base huts, possible fireplaces and remains of meals and cooking activities. The evidence indicates that lifestyle practices varied across the continent and differed depending on climate, environment and natural resources.
Shell middens are the most obvious remains of meals and are useful because they provide insight into ancient Aboriginal diets and past environments and can also be radiocarbon dated to establish the age of a site.
The Coobool Creek collection consists of the remains of 126 individuals excavated from a sand ridge at Coobool Crossing, New South Wales, in 1950. After their excavation, they became part of the University of Melbourne collection until they were returned to the Aboriginal community for reburial in 1985.
The remains date from 9000 to 13,000 years old and are significant because of their large size when compared with Aboriginal people who appeared within the last 6000 years. They are physically similar to Kow Swamp people with whom they shared the cultural practice of artificial cranial deformation.
This ancient burial site in northern Victoria was excavated between 1968 and 1972. The human skeletons discovered here were extremely significant because they were accurately dated between 9500 to 14,000 years ago and demonstrated substantial differences between ancient and more recent Aboriginal people.
The remains of over forty individuals have been found at Kow Swamp and include those of men, women and children. This burial site is one of the largest from this time period anywhere in the world. Many of the skeletons have a greater skeletal mass, more robust jaw structures and larger areas of muscle attachment than in contemporary Aboriginal men. The female skeletons from this region also show similar differences when compared with modern Aboriginal women.
- ‘Kow Swamp 1’. Human skull rediscovered in 1967 in the National Museum of Victoria by Alan Thorne and Phillip Macumber. It is dated at 10,000 years old. The skull’s original burial location was traced through police reports, and excavations at Kow Swamp began soon after.
- 'Kow Swamp 5’. This 13,000-year-old skull is one of the better-preserved examples from Kow Swamp. It has a greater skeletal mass, a more robust jaw structure and larger areas of muscle attachment than in contemporary Aboriginal men.
- ‘Kow Swamp 14’. These remains were of a male skeleton with knees were drawn up under the chest with the hands in front of the face. In other Kow Swamp burials the skeleton was fully extended. It is not known why different burial positions were used.
The oldest human remains in Australia were found at Lake Mungo in south-west New South Wales. This site was occupied from 45,000 to 20,000 years ago when it was part of the Willandra Lakes system. Lake Mungo has been devoid of water for the last 16,000 years and is now a desert. In the past, rainfall was higher and the lakes contained plenty of fish and shellfish, making them a valuable source of food for the people that occupied the area.
- ‘Lake Mungo 1’ (WLH 1). Discovered in1969. At 26,000 years old, this is the most securely dated human burial in Australia and the earliest ritually cremated remains found anywhere in the world. The cremation process shrinks bone and has made the skeleton of this originally small-bodied woman even smaller. Dr Alan Thorne reconstructed the skull from over 300 fragments.
- 'Lake Mungo 3’ (WLH 3). Discovered in1974. Due to the poor preservation of the pelvis it is not clear if this specimen is a man or a woman. It was laid out for burial and covered in red ochre. There is some controversy over the date of this burial with ages ranging from 26,000 to 60,000 years old. A date closer to 40,000 years old is most probable. The oldest Australian human remains have been found at Lake Mungo.
In 2001, Australian scientists claimed that they had extracted mitochondrial DNA from ‘Lake Mungo 3’ and nine other ancient Australians. They concluded that the genes of the modern-looking ‘Mungo Man’ were different from modern humans, proving that not all Homo sapiens have the same recent ancestor as stated in the ‘Out of Africa’ theory. These claims are controversial and have been met with a general lack of acceptance in scientific communities.
Ancient DNA is easily contaminated and rarely survives for 30,000 years in conditions like those found in Australia. Because contamination occurs so frequently, standard authentication tests need to be performed before the results are accepted. These have yet to be done in this case. Different methods of analysing this DNA suggests different scenarios, showing that Mungo DNA can fall within the modern human range.
A skull was found in 1925 at Cohuna, north-west Kow Swamp, Victoria, and is undated. However, the similarity between this skull and the Kow Swamp people suggests they are both from a similar time period. This skull’s long, high, flat forehead reflects the characteristics of cranial deformation and its teeth and palate are larger than the current Australian average.
Evidence of human activity at Keilor dates back nearly 40,000 years. Stone flakes and charcoal deposits have been found in the lowest archaeological levels.
One of the key remains from this site was that of a 12,000 year old skull discovered in 1940. It is one of the earlier prehistoric Aboriginal remains found in Australia.
A cranium was discovered in 1884 on the Darling Downs, Queensland. It was the first Pleistocene human skull to be found in Australia. It is dated to between 9000 and 11,000 years old.
When it was found, the skull was covered in calcium carbonate, which gave the skull a deformed appearance. After cleaning, it was discovered that this skull belonged to a boy of about 15 years of age, who had died as a result of a blow to the side of the head. Features of the skull, such as the teeth and jaws, are remarkably large, but do fit within the range of variation of the Australian Aboriginal population.
One of many cultural practices that can alter the appearance of human skeletons is skull deformation. There is evidence that some Aboriginal groups did practise skull deformation in ancient times. Australian scientist Dr Peter Brown proposed that the ‘robust’ features seen in skulls such as ‘Cohuna’ and those from Kow Swamp and Coobool Creek are the result of such practices in the past. Prolonged pressing and binding of the head can produce characteristics such as long receding foreheads, flat frontal and occipital bones and lengthening of the skull.
Andolfatto P (2001). Contrasting patterns of X-linked autosomal nucleotide variation in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. Mol Biol Evol 18: 279–290.
Aquadro CF, Bauer DuMont V, Reed FA (2001). Genome-wide variation in the human fruitfly: a comparison. Curr Opin Genet Dev 11: 627–634.
Begun DJ, Aquadro CF (1995a). Evolution at the tip base of the X chromosome in an African population of Drosophila melanogaster. Mol Biol Evol 12: 382–390.
Begun DJ, Aquadro CF (1995b). Molecular variation at the vermilion locus in geographically diverse populations of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. Genetics 140: 1019–1032.
Bijlsma R, Bundgaard J, Van Putten WF (1999). Environmental dependence of inbreeding depression purging in Drosophila melanogaster. J Evol Biol 12: 1125–1137.
Boyce TM, Zwick ME, Aquadro CF (1989). Mitochondrial DNA in the bark weevils: size structure heteroplasmy. Genetics 123: 825–836.
Buroker NE, Brown JR, Gilbert TA, O'Hara PJ, Beckenbach AT, Thomas WK, Smith MJ (1990). Length heteroplasmy of sturgeon mitochondrial DNA: an illegitimate elongation model. Genetics 124: 157–163.
Caracristi G, Schlotterer C (2003). Genetic differentiation between American European Drosophila melanogaster populations could be attributed to admixture of African alleles. Mol Biol Evol 20: 792–799.
Chinnery PF, Samuels DC, Elson J, Turnbull DM (2002). Accumulation of mitochondrial DNA mutations in ageing cancer, mitochondrial disease: is there a common mechanism? Lancet 360: 1323–1325.
Davíd J, Capy P (1988). Genetic variation of Drosophila melanogaster natural populations. Trends Genet 4: 106–111.
Denver DR, Morris K, Lynch M, Vassilieva L, Thomas WK (2000). High direct estimate of mutation rate in the mitochondrial genome of Caenorhabditis elegans. Science 289: 2342–2344.
Falush D, Iwasa Y (1999). Size-dependent mutability microsatellite constraints. Mol Biol Evol 16: 960–966.
Feder ME, Hofmann GE (1999). Heat-shock proteins molecular chaperones, the stress response: evolutionary ecological physiology. Annu Rev Physiol 61: 243–282.
Grivell LA, Artal-Sanz M, Hakkaart G, de Jong L, Nijtmans LG, van Oosterum K et al (1999). Mitochondrial assembly in yeast. FEBS Lett 452: 57–60.
Hale LR, Singh RS (1986). Extensive variation heteroplasmy in size of mitochondrial DNA among geographic populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78: 8813–8817.
Hale LR, Singh RS (1991). A comprehensive study of genetic variation in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. IV. Mitochondrial DNA variation the role of history vsselection in the genetic structure of geographic populations. Genetics 129: 103–117.
Hartl DL, Clark AG (1997). Principles of Population Genetics. Sinauer: Sunderland, MA.
Hayasaka K, Ishida T, Horai S (1991). Heteroplasmy polymorphism in the major noncoding region of mitochondrial DNA in Japanese monkeys: association with tandemly repeated sequences. Mol Biol Evol 8: 399–415.
Kann LM, Rosenblum EB, Rand DM (1998). Aging mating, the evolution of mtDNA heteroplasmy in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 2372–2377.
Lewis DL, Farr CL, Farquhar AL, Kaguni LS (1994). Sequence organization, evolution of the A+T region of Drosophila melanogaster mitochondrial DNA. Mol Biol Evol 11: 523–538.
Lunt DH, Whipple LE, Hyman BC (1998). Mitochondrial DNA variable number of tandem repeats (VNTRs): utility and problems in molecular ecology. Mol Ecol 7: 1441–1455.
Moriyama EN, Powell JR (1996). Intraspecific nuclear DNA variation in Drosophila. Mol Biol Evol 13: 261–277.
Powell JR (1997). Progress and Prospects in Evolutionary Biology: The Drosophila Model. Oxford University Press: New York, NY.
Rand DM (1993). Endotherms, ectotherms, and mitochondrial genome-size variation. J Mol Evol 37: 281–295.
Rand DM (2001). The units of selection on mitochondrial DNA. Annu Rev Ecol System 32: 415–448.
Rand DM, Dorfsman ML, Kann LM (1994). Neutral and non-neutral evolution of Drosophila mitochondrial DNA. Genetics 138: 741–756.
Rand DM, Harrison RG (1989). Molecular population genetics of mtDNA size variation in crickets. Genetics 121: 551–569.
Rubinsztein DC, Amos B, Cooper G (1999). Microsatellite and trinucleotide-repeat evolution: evidence for mutational bias and different rates of evolution in different lineages. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 354: 1095–1099.
Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989). Molecular Cloning: A laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory: Cold Spring Harbor, New York.
Schug MD, Mackay TF, Aquadro CF (1997). Low mutation rates of microsatellite loci in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat Genet 15: 99–102.
Selosse M-A, Albert B, Godelle B (2001). Reducing the genome size of organelles favours gene transfer to the nucleus. Trends Ecol Evol 16: 135–141.
Sgro CM, Geddes G, Fowler K, Partridge L (2000). Selection on age at reproduction in Drosophila melanogaster: female mating frequency as a correlated response. Evolution 54: 2152–2155.
Solignac M, Monnerot M, Mounolou J-C (1986). Mitochondrial DNA evolution in the melanogaster species subgroup of Drosophilia. J Mol Evol 23: 31–40.
Steinmetz LM, Scharfe C, Deutschbauer AM, Mokranjac D, Herman ZS, Jones T, Chu AM, Giaever G, Prokisch H, Oefner PJ, Davis RW (2002). Systematic screen for human disease genes in yeast. Nat Genet 31: 400–404.
Zouros E, Pogson GH, Cook DI, Dadswell MJ (1992). Apparent selective neutrality of mitochondrial DNA size variation: a test in deep sea scallop Placopecten magellanicus. Evolution 46: 1466–1476.
The authors greatly appreciate the support of growers who permit access to crops to collect material used in our research. Expert technical assistance was provided by Bruno B. Batista and Danielle Souza. Owain Edwards, Karl Gordon and John Oakeshott (CSIRO), and Derek Russell (University of Melbourne) provided comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript that improved its clarity, and Paulo E. Degrande (Federal University of Grande Dourados, Brazil) helped improve clarity of a final version of this manuscript.
Where Did a Young-earth Worldview Come From?
Simply put, it came from the Bible. Of course, the Bible doesn’t say explicitly anywhere, “The earth is 6,000 years old.” Good thing it doesn’t otherwise it would be out of date the following year. But we wouldn’t expect an all-knowing God to make that kind of a mistake.
God gave us something better. In essence, He gave us a “birth certificate.” For example, using a personal birth certificate, a person can calculate how old he is at any point. It is similar with the earth. Genesis 1 says that the earth was created on the first day of creation ( Genesis 1:1–5 ). From there, we can begin to calculate the age of the earth.
Let’s do a rough calculation to show how this works. The age of the earth can be estimated by taking the first five days of creation (from earth’s creation to Adam), then following the genealogies from Adam to Abraham in Genesis 5 and 11, then adding in the time from Abraham to today.
Adam was created on day 6, so there were five days before him. If we add up the dates from Adam to Abraham, we get about 2,000 years, using the Masoretic Hebrew text of Genesis 5 and 11.3 Whether Christian or secular, most scholars would agree that Abraham lived about 2,000 B.C. (4,000 years ago).
So a simple calculation is:
At this point, the first five days are negligible. Quite a few people have done this calculation using the Masoretic text (which is what most English translations are based on) and with careful attention to the biblical details, they have arrived at the same time frame of about 6,000 years, or about 4000 B.C. Two of the most popular, and perhaps best, are a recent work by Dr. Floyd Jones4 and a much earlier book by Archbishop James Ussher5 (1581–1656). See table 1.
Table 1. Jones and Ussher
Name Age Calculated Reference and Date Archbishop James Ussher 4004 B.C. The Annals of the World, A.D. 1658 Dr. Floyd Nolan Jones 4004 B.C. The Chronology of the Old Testament, A.D. 1993
The misconception exists that Ussher and Jones were the only ones to arrive at a date of 4000 B.C. however, this is not the case at all. Jones6 lists several chronologists who have undertaken the task of calculating the age of the earth based on the Bible , and their calculations range from 5501 to 3836 B.C. A few are listed in table 2.
Table 2. Chronologists’ Calculations According to Dr. Jones
Chronologist When Calculated? Date B.C. 1 Julius Africanus c. 240 5501 2 George Syncellus c. 810 5492 3 John Jackson 1752 5426 4 Dr William Hales c. 1830 5411 5 Eusebius c. 330 5199 6 Marianus Scotus c. 1070 4192 7 L. Condomanus n/a 4141 8 Thomas Lydiat c. 1600 4103 9 M. Michael Maestlinus c. 1600 4079 10 J. Ricciolus n/a 4062 11 Jacob Salianus c. 1600 4053 12 H. Spondanus c. 1600 4051 13 Martin Anstey 1913 4042 14 W. Lange n/a 4041 15 E. Reinholt n/a 4021 16 J. Cappellus c. 1600 4005 17 E. Greswell 1830 4004 18 E. Faulstich 1986 4001 19 D. Petavius c. 1627 3983 20 Frank Klassen 1975 3975 21 Becke n/a 3974 22 Krentzeim n/a 3971 23 W. Dolen 2003 3971 24 E. Reusnerus n/a 3970 25 J. Claverius n/a 3968 26 C. Longomontanus c. 1600 3966 27 P. Melanchthon c. 1550 3964 28 J. Haynlinus n/a 3963 29 A. Salmeron d. 1585 3958 30 J. Scaliger d. 1609 3949 31 M. Beroaldus c. 1575 3927 32 A. Helwigius c. 1630 3836
As you will likely note from table 2, the dates are not all 4004 B.C. There are several reasons chronologists have different dates,7 but two primary reasons:
- Some used the Septuagint or another early translation instead of the Hebrew Masoretic text. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, done about 250 B.C. by about 70 Jewish scholars (hence it is often cited as the LXX, which is the Roman numeral for 70). It is good in most places, but appears to have a number of inaccuracies. For example, one relates to the Genesis chronologies where the LXX indicates that Methuselah would have lived past the Flood, without being on the ark!
- Several points in the biblical time-line are not straightforward to calculate. They require very careful study of more than one passage. These include exactly how much time the Israelites were in Egypt and what Terah’s age was when Abraham was born. (See Jones’s and Ussher’s books for a detailed discussion of these difficulties.)
The first four in table 2 (bolded) are calculated from the Septuagint, which gives ages for the patriarchs’ firstborn much higher than the Masoretic text or the Samarian Pentateuch (a version of the Old Testament from the Jews in Samaria just before Christ). Because of this, the Septuagint adds in extra time. Though the Samarian and Masoretic texts are much closer, they still have a few differences. See table 3.8
Using data from table 2 (excluding the Septuagint calculations and including Jones and Ussher), the average date of the creation of the earth is 4045 B.C. This still yields an average of about 6,000 years for the age of the earth.
Table 3. Septuagint, Masoretic, and Samarian Early Patriarchal Ages at the Birth of the Following Son
Name Masoretic Samarian Pentateuch Septuagint Adam 130 130 230 Seth 105 105 205 Enosh 90 90 190 Cainan 70 70 170 Mahalaleel 65 65 165 Jared 162 62 162 Enoch 65 65 165 Methuselah 187 67 167 Lamech 182 53 188 Noah 500 500 500
Imagine, for a moment, a world in which Jane’s Addiction never existed. Nothing’s Shocking was never released in the summer of ’88. Lollapalooza never launched three summers later. Perry Bernstein remained on the East Coast, never boarding that Greyhound Bus and heading across country to Los Angeles like so many dreamers and visionaries before him did. What kind of world would that be?
No kind of world we’d want to live in.
Without Jane’s Addiction, there might still have been a Soundgarden, an Alice in Chains, a Nine Inch Nails, a Rage Against the Machine, and even a Nirvana, but they wouldn’t sound the same. As Tom Morello said when inducting Jane’s into Guitar Center’s Rock Walk of Fame in June 2011: “Nirvana often gets credit for being the first ‘alternative’ band to break through, the band that changed music and led rock out of the hair metal wilderness of the ’80’s. That’s just not true. It was Jane’s Addiction.”
As the years have passed, Jane’s Addiction have kept pace in a modern culture that the band helped to expand and progress. They didn’t invent the metal fan who also loves rap. That kid already existed. So did the Goth kid who also owned Zeppelin records. But before all music and information was instantly available, Jane’s did enlighten the metal fan who’d never even had a chance to hear rap — or industrial or prog or British indie — and that metal fan is better and more open-minded for it. And now, so are their children. “In 1988, Jane’s Addiction saved my life,” Foo Fighters drummer Taylor Hawkins has said. Jane’s didn’t invent modern rock, but they turned modern rockers into an enduring and inclusive tribe. “Jane’s was the only band I saw in those times who had that ‘I-will-follow-them-anywhere type’ of crowd. There were a lot of great bands around at that time,” Henry Rollins told Spin, “but Jane’s had this tribal thing happening with their fans. It was very powerful.”
August 2013 marks 25 years since the release of Nothing’s Shocking — an album like no other then, and like few others now, as influential as it is. Many critics were puzzled in ’88 upon first hearing those 11 songs. “A classic love ’em or hate ’em outfit,” Rolling Stone observed. “The band is great. And it is also full of shit. Often at the same time.” The music runs from proggy pomp (“Up the Beach”), to stripped-down, barking punk (“Idiot’s Rule,” “Had A Dad”), to thundering hard rock (“Mountain Song,” “Ocean Size”). It’s dubby and doomy one moment (“Ted Just Admit It,” which features samples of dialogue from serial killer Ted Bundy) and sweet and pastoral the next (“Summertime Rolls”). There’s whimsy inside (“Standing in the Shower Thinking”), hilarity, too (the faux lounge-jazz of “Thank You Boys”), and… there’s “Pigs In Zen.” How does one even describe “Pigs in Zen” except to ask, “What other songs are like ‘Pigs in Zen?’” Oh, yes, and it also contains modern rock’s “Free Bird” — the sad, sweet, and eternal “Jane Says,” a steel-drum-driven pop gem that everyone can sing along to. The riff and the chorus are in our DNA a quarter-century on.
Nothing’s Shocking is one of those once heard, never forgotten albums that bands don’t even pretend to make anymore easily on par with other titanic releases that came out of L.A. in the ’80s and early ’90s: Appetite For Destruction, Straight Outta Compton, Paul’s Boutique, and The Chronic. And yet, the Jane’s oeuvre and myth doesn’t feel aged, or classic. If anything, it’s still a live wire dangerous and dark in spite of the passage of time. “My sex and my drugs and my rock n’ roll,” Perry Farrell sang back in 1990 on the Ritual De Lo Habitual album, “are the only things that keeps me here.” Two decades later there’s not one note of corniness or kitsch to Jane’s. While the band never said, “Hey kids, drugs are cool,” they made no apology for exulting in substances stronger than pot. Sex, as Jane’s portrayed it, was bold as well a ritual, with candles lit, altars built, spirits stirred. It’s part of what bonded them to a devoted fan base and let’s face it, what kept them interesting.
Lyrically, Jane’s made sense of a rapidly changing world — a time when mutually assured nuclear destruction and the AIDS crisis were looming realities, racial tension was at a modern peak, and a generation gap between the Baby Boomers and a still-unnamed Generation X was growing increasingly wide and hostile. Jane’s didn’t shrink from any of this. They celebrated it. Their music was something to wrap yourself in and, certainly in the ’80s, it protected you from the elements in the sometimes terrifying new age. Jane’s would not be bullied. When MTV refused to play the video for the single “Mountain Song,” the band simply added some footage to it and sold it in stores (a few years before Madonna had the same “idea”). When several stores wouldn’t stock their 1990 album Ritual De Lo Habitual (as good as Nothing’s Shocking and anchored by the epic “Three Days”), Jane’s re-issued it with a white sleeve and the First Amendment printed on it. Here was a band who knew how to give the finger constructively and with a little mischief.
Jane’s Addiction passed into legend early and by design. They broke up after six years together in 1991 at the height of their popularity: headlining the inaugural Lollapalooza tour. ”That first Lollapalooza, we were in Los Angeles recording Nevermind,” Dave Grohl told Time Out Chicago. “We heard about the show and Kurt and I got tickets somehow and decided to go down. And when we arrived, there were more piercings, more tribal tattoos and more Rollins Band T-shirts than I’d ever seen in one place at one time. That was early summer. By that fall, radio and MTV and music had changed,” Grohl said, adding, “I can’t even count how many people Perry’s opened the doors for.”
Next year, Jane’s Addiction will be eligible for induction into the Rock and Roll of Fame and could join other acts who are credited with bringing the college-rock sensibility into the mainstream, like R.E.M. and the Beastie Boys. While Jane’s Addiction absolutely deserve to be there, in a way, like most larger-than-life inductees, they’re more than a band: They’re a tool for challenging your dreary reality. Perry Farrell saw the country (and the record industry) and asked, “Why is it this way, when it should be that way?” Then he changed it.
Jane’s Addiction is still a frighteningly powerful live band and an ever-exploring recording act. Original members Farrell, Dave Navarro, and Stephen Perkins reunited in 1997, then again in 2001, and released a third studio album (fourth if you count the live 1987 self-titled release, known to most fans as “Triple X,” for the indie label that released it) Strays, which features current Jane’s bassist, Chris Chaney, and was produced by the legendary Bob Ezrin (Pink Floyd’s The Wall). In 2008 founding bassist Eric Avery rejoined. In 2011 The Great Escape Artist was released to critical acclaim. “It sounds like a band re-vitalized,” Spin raved, while Billboard called the album “a dynamic collection that features some of the band’s best work.”
Farrell, Navarro, and Perkins, it should be said, still look almost exactly as they did in the ’90s. How on earth is that the case? Are they ingesting whatever it is David Bowie ingested up to 2004? This eternal youth visage must make it easier for their new fans to attend shows and imagine it’s still 1988 or 1991, but trust us, the rock world — it’s politics, business practices, and factions — were very different back then. Not to mention the music.
So again, take a moment and imagine a world in which Jane’s Addiction never existed. It’d be a less exciting place to live, wouldn’t it? Here is a band that helped keep rock and roll unpredictable, inspiring, dangerous, and constantly moving forward. As it should be.
Watch the video: Ακολουθώντας τους προϊστορικούς ανθρώπους Επεισόδιο 5 Ένας Νέος Κόσμος (May 2022).
- The grasping hands and feet of primates are adaptations for hanging on to tree branches.
- Scales containing the protein keratin waterproof the skin, preventing dehydration in dry air.