Western Washington University
Western CEDAR
Anthropology
Social and Behavioral Sciences
5-2003
Teaching Human Evolution
Joan C. Stevenson Dr.
Western Washington University, [email protected]
David L. Alles
Follow this and additional works at: http://cedar.wwu.edu/anthropology_facpubs
Part of the Anthropology Commons
Recommended Citation
Stevenson, Joan C. Dr. and Alles, David L., "Teaching Human Evolution" (2003). Anthropology. 4.
http://cedar.wwu.edu/anthropology_facpubs/4
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Social and Behavioral Sciences at Western CEDAR. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Anthropology by an authorized administrator of Western CEDAR. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Teaching Human Evolution
Author(s): David L. Alles and Joan C. Stevenson
Source: The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 65, No. 5 (May, 2003), pp. 333-339
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the National Association of Biology
Teachers
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4451511 .
Accessed: 22/10/2014 16:38
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
University of California Press and National Association of Biology Teachers are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Biology Teacher.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Teaching HUMAN EVOLUTION
DAVIDL. ALLES
A
\
s science educators,we have two
goals in writing this paper. The first is to show the
importanceof teachinghumanevolutionto all students.
The second is to provideup-to-dateresourcesfor classroom teachersto use in teachingthe subject.Secondary
biology textbooks suffer from the inherent limitations
of mass producedbooks makingit difficultfor them to
stay currentwith rapidlychangingscientificfields such
as paleoanthropology.One of our motives for writing
this paper is to compensatefor this inherentlimitation
of textbooks.
The most important resource we provide is a
review of current scientific researchon human evolution that stresses the broad frameworkof what is reliablyknown about our origins. To this we have included a list of recommended books taken from our
researchthat we feel are the most useful and accessible. In addition to text resources,we have added a list
of web sites on human evolution that provide an
increasingly sophisticated source of information.
Together,this materialshould provide teacherswith a
DAVID
L. ALLES
is an Instructorin the Departmentof Biology and
is a Professor in the Department of
JOAN C. STEVENSON
Anthropology, both at Western Washington University,
Bellingham, WA98225-9160; e-mail: [email protected].
JOAN C. STEVENSON
variety of up-to-date resources for teaching human
evolution.
Why Teach Human Evolution?
Modern science has reached the point where the
broadoutlineof our originis known.Foreach of us, this
scientific knowledge of human origins and evolution
has a specialsignificance,becausecentralto each of our
individualviews of the world is a concept of who and
what we are.The beliefs we hold about ourselvesdrive
our attitudesand our actions and, as such, determine
the kind of people we are and ultimatelythe kind of
societywe have.In the past we have answeredthe questions aboutour originswith the myths and creationstories unique to the cultureof our birth.But todaywe live
in a world where scientificanswers to these questions
are available.All of us can share these answersbecause
they arebased on public scientificknowledgeinsteadof
privatebeliefs.It is the knowledgeof who and what we
arethatwe can hold in commonin our increasinglypluralisticsociety.This scientificknowledgeof human origins need not replacefaithin the moralteachingsof any
belief system.Butif self knowledgeis the most valuable
knowledgewe can possess, then what modern science
can tell us aboutwho and what we areis the most valuable knowledgewe can teach our students.
333
EVOLUTION
HUMAN
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A Review of Current Research on
Human Evolution
We haveconfinedour reviewof humanevolutionto
the periodbetween the late Mioceneeight millionyears
ago (m.y.a.)and 100,000 years ago. This period marks
the evolutionary transition from our last common
ancestor with modern chimpanzees to the first fully
modern humans. Because of limited space, and to do
properjustice to the subject,we have not included the
last hundred thousand years of human evolution and
history.Our knowledge of this period is growingdaily
and is best left as a story in itself.
Setting the Stage
To fully understandhuman evolution it should be
seen as a recentinstallmentin the much largerstory of
the evolution of life. Our assumption is that teachers
will set this largerstagefor the storyof humanevolution
by presentingthe history of life on Earth.Human evolution can then be understood as only one chapterin
the largerstory of vertebrateand mammalianevolution.
Having said this, we must confine ourselves in this
paperto setting the stagewith those eventsjust priorto
the evolution of the last common ancestor of chimpanzees and humans.
Ten million years ago Africahad a much wetterclimate than today (Coppens, 1999). Tropicalrainforests
near the equator extended across unbroken lowlands
fromthe Atlanticto the Indianoceans.Startingeightmillion years ago, tectonic forcesbegan to split east Africa
alongwhat we know todayas the east Africanriftvalley.
Upliftcausedby these tectonicforceson the west side of
the riftpreventedthe easterlyflowof rainclouds and created a rainshadowovereastAfrica.The resultingclimate
changewas compoundedby a simultaneousglobalcooling and dryingtrend.EastAfricabeganto dry out.
These geologicaleventssplit the common ancestors
of modern chimpanzees and ourselves into two geographically separate populations. One population
remainedin the tropicalrain forestsof west Africaand
gaverise to modernchimpanzees.The otherpopulation
slowlybeganto adaptto the increasinglyopen, dryhabitats of east, and perhapsnorth central,Africaand eventuallygaverise to modern humans.The story of human
evolution follows the complex history of changing climate followedby evolutionaryadaptationand radiation
in east Africanhominins, the group to which all the
directancestorsof modernhumans belong.
An Overview
The followingelementsprovidea frameworkfor the
broad patterns of hominin evolution (modified from
Foley, 1999).
1. The late Miocene (8-5 m.y.a.) witnessed the
diversificationof the African apes as the east
Africanclimateshiftedfromtropicalrainforestto
dryerconditions.
2. Bipedalismdeveloped in late Miocene to early
Pliocene hominins (6-4 m.y.a.) on the eastern
side of the African continent, possibly in
response to more open habitats.
3. An adaptive,radiationof Africanhominins took
place between 4 and 1.7 m.y.a., as east Africa
again experienced further climate shifts to the
dryerconditionsof the currentIce Age.
4. The period between 1.7 m.y.a. to the present,
which spans over two thirds of the currentIce
Age,saw a dramaticincreasein the cranialcapacity of our ancestors, effectivelydoubling brain
size.
5. This same period includes the explosive geographicalexpansion and rapiddivergenceof the
genus Homo.
6. This expansion was followed by a subsequent
reduction in species richness, first with the
extinction of the robust hominins and later of
regional species of Homo. These extinctions
resulted,finally,in the survivalof only one Homo
lineage,ourselves.
The CurrentCast of Characters
The EarliestHominins
Modernapes and humansdiffergreatly,but the earliest hominins contrasted in subtle ways from living
apes primarilyin their increasingreliance on bipedalism. The skeletalindicatorsof bipedalisminclude an Sshaped (as opposed to C-shaped)spinal column, a forward placement of the hole at the base of the skull
wherethe spinalcolumnenters(the foramenmagnum),
and a shorteningand broadeningof the pelvis to make
it "bowl-shaped."
These changeswere accompaniedby
shifts in muscle groups,especiallythe glutealand hamstringmuscles,a lengtheningof the lower limbs, particularlythe femurin the genus Homo,and changesin the
feet to become weight-bearingstructures (Poirier &
McKee,1999).
The earliestpossible hominin to date is the newly
tchadensisfrom Chad in the
discoveredSahelanthropus
Sahelregion of sub-SaharanAfrica,which has tentatively been dated to between 6 and 7 million years old
(Brunet,2002). The fossils include an almost complete
craniumwith a mosaic of ape and hominin featuresbut
no post-cranialskeletal material that could confirm
whetherS. tchadensis
was bipedal.
334 THE
AMERICAN
BIOLOGY
TEACHER,
VOLUME
65,NO.
5,MAY
2003
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure1.
Hominin
Evolution
7 Million
YearsAgoto the Present.Vertical
ScaleinMillions
ofYears
(m.y.).
0.0
-
Homo -
--
sapiens1 K.I
-
Homo
neanderthalensis
Horno
erectusI
(Asia)
1
1.0
Homo
heidelbergensis
U
I
I
?H.antecessor
(Europe)
K
- erectus
- - - (Afris:a)
?H.
- - H
o7I
H
.
boisei
Homo
ergaster(Africa)
7
2.0 1
2.0
|
ti
- .H~
- - -
7
(s.Africa)
Homo(?)
|Hom
g
Homo(?
rudolfensis j
habilis
first
stone
tools2.5m.y.
D
*
H
H
-
H[Prnhou
aethiopicus
A.africanus
(s
Africa)
A.bahrelghazali
D
II
- I~~~~~~~ ~
' ' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I
?
A.garhi
.
3.0 -----i-
Kenyanthropus
(e.Africa)
L
afarensis
Australopithecus
platyops
7
?
Australopithecusanamensis ?i
4.0
I I
5.0..
.
Ardipithecus
ramidus
Orrorin
tugenensls.
6.0
Ug
tchadensis
Sahelanthropus
Rectangles
represent
approximate
firstandlastdatesforspecies.
Shading
andrelative
horizontal
position
separate
genera.
(Asfaw,
et
Brunet,et
al.,
2002;
Cavalli-Sforza,
al.,l1999;
1998;Foley,l1999;
Haile-Selassie,
2001;Hoss,
2000;Klein,
1999;leakey,et
al.,2001;
Senut,
etal.,2001)
HUMAN
EVOlUTION
335
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The earliest hominin bipeds may have appeared
between 7 to 5 m.y.a.An example of these earlybipeds
may be the recently discoveredfossils of Orrorintugenensisfound in the TugenHills of Kenyaand dated to 6
m.y.a.(Senutet al., 2001). Thick-enameled,althoughrelativelysmall,molarsand a human-likefemurlink it with
later hominins. It also exhibits muscle attachmentson
the humerus and curved fingerbones that are consistent with arborealactivitylinking it to the apes. Based
on associated plant and faunal remains, 0. tugenensis
probablypreferredopen woodlandsnear forests.
In additionto 0. tugenensis,there are 11 specimens
representing at least 5 individuals of Ardipithecus
ramidusfrom the MiddleAwashareaof Ethiopiadating
to 5.8-5.2 m.y.a.(Haile-Selassie,2001). Another50 partial individuals,representing perhaps a separatesubspecies, were recovered at the 4.4 m.y. old site near
Aramis,Ethiopia (Klein, 1999). The oldest specimens
exhibitderiveddentalfeaturesthat areonly sharedwith
later hominins (Haile-Selassie,2001). The fossils from
the Aramissite exhibita forwardlyplaced foramenmagnum and apparentlyfree upper arms, traitsconsistent
with bipedalism(Klein,1999). However,the association
with high altitude, closed canopy woodland habitat,
and thin enamelon the molarcrownsarecharacteristics
not found in laterhominins. This suggests a species at,
or close to, the sharedancestorof humans and modern
chimpanzees.
Australopiths
All laterhominins,includingmembersof the genus
Austr-alopithecus,are characterizedby bipedal locomotion, and the numerous species reflect differencesin
diet and presumed ecologicalspecializations.In general, the older species share more primitive traits with
their Mioceneforebears.Among these older species are
Australopithecusanamensis (4.2-3.9 m.y.a.) from Kenya,
and another closely related species, Australopithecus
afarensis(3.8-2.9 m.y.a.), from Hadar, Ethiopia and
Laetoli,Tanzania(Wood & Richmond, 2000). Hadar
and Laetolicombinedprovideat least 60 to 100 partial
individuals of A. afarensis.Adding to these species, a
mandible and first upper premolarof Australopithecus
werediscoveredat KoroToro,in Chadand
bahrelghazali
dated to 3.5-3.0 m.y.a..Although initiallyplaced in A.
afarensis,these fossils mayremainassignedto theirown
species because of an apparentlyflatter face evident
fromthe chin.
A. anamensisand A. afarensisexhibitthickerenamel
and broadermolars indicatinga dependence on nuts,
grains,or hardfruit.A. anamensi.s
is foundin deposits of
former riverinewoodlands and gallery forests of the
TurkanaBasin, Kenya.A. afarenLsis
may have occupied
more varied habitatsfrom dry bushland to woodlands
or riverineforests(Wardet al., 1999). The foramenmagnum and tibia of A. anamensis are typical of habitual
bipeds and the elbow and knee joints may be more
humanlikethan in A. afarensis (Tattersall& Schwartz,
2000). As in laterhominins A. anamensis had relatively
small upper incisors and less projectingcanines.Large,
projecting canine teeth are characteristicof our ape
ancestors.A. anamensis shares with A. afarensis curved
fingers and a relativelylong radius;both traits would
have been useful in the trees.Presumablytheirbipedalism was intermediatebetweenapes and humans(Stern,
2000).
The betterknownAustralopithecusafarensisincludes
many partialbones, a skull, and also almost half of an
adult female skeleton known as "Lucy"(Wood &
Collard,1999; Wood & Richmond,2000). The skulls,
jaws, and teeth are very ape-like except for reduced
canines, largerpostcanine teeth, and a reduced snout.
The body trunks are "invertedfunnels,"as in the great
apes, and the upper limbs are relativelyshorterthan in
apes but longer than in humans. Finger lengths are
intermediatebut the tips of the fingersare narrowand
finger bones are longitudinally curved as in chimpanzees. The feet are also intermediatebut include
shortened toes and a stout heel characteristicof later
hominins. Footprintsat Laetoli,possibly made by A.
afarensis,also support a pictureof a habitualbiped that
stood 1 to 1.5 meters tall and walked fully upright3.5
m.y.a.(Agnew& Demas, 1998).
LaterAustralopiths& Related Genera
Specimens of the 3.5-3.3 m.y. old Kenyanithropus
platyops,recoveredfrom the TurkanaLake region of
Kenya,include a temporalbone, two partialupperjaws,
isolated teeth, and most of a cranium (Leakey et al.,
2001). The 3.5 m.y.old site includesboth formergrassland and wooded habitats. Kenyanthropusplatyops had a
small ear hole, like A. anamensis,and thick enameled
cheek teeth and a small brain like A. afarensisand A.
anamensis(Lieberman,2001). It shares few cranialfeatureswith the "robust"hominins(see below), and is distinguishedfromother australopithecinesby derivedfeatures of the flatterlower face.The species'unique combinationof features,perhapspartlysharedwith the later
Homo rudolfensis, may justify assigning it to the new
genus Kenyanthropus.
Severalcave sites in South Africadiscoveredin the
1920s and 1930s revealed the remains of
Australopithecusafricanus (Wolpoff,1999). Dating these
fossils has traditionallybeen done by comparingmammal fossils from these sites to fossil mammals from
radiometricallydated sites in east African.They suggest
that the brecciacontainingA. africanusremainsmaybe
3 to 2.4 m.y. old. Relativeto the precedingaustralop-
336 THE
AMERICAN
BIOLOGY
TEACHER,
VOLUME
65,NO.
5,MAY
2003
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ithecine species the face of A. africanusis broaderand
less projecting.The brainis slightlylargerbut the body
is much the same. Their hands had broader tips presumably associatedwith larger,sensitive fingerpads, a
featurefound in laterspecies of Homo.
Australopithecus garhi was discovered at Bouri,
Ethiopia(2.5 m.y. old), and includes the remainsof at
least 5 hominins found in ancient lake margin sediments (Asfaw et al., 1999; Heinzelin et al., 1999). Its
chewing muscles must have been largejudging by the
teeth and conspicuouspostorbitalconstriction.A. garhi
also exhibits a relativelylonger femur reminiscent of
Homo, but a relativelylong forearmis consistent with
australopithanatomy.
The "Robust"Hominins
The term "robust"in paleoanthropologyhas come
to referto the massivejaws and teeth of a group of later
hominins. Robust species exhibit a number of unique
and, therefore, derived features including greatly
enlarged molars and premolars (Klein, 1999). Some
investigatorsemphasize the unique anatomy of these
robust forms by placing them in their own genus,
Paranthropus. The earliest member of this group is
Paranthropus aethiopicus whose fossils include the
famous "Black skull" discovered at West Turkana,
Kenya(2.5 m.y.old) and mandiblesand teeth recovered
from the Omo region of Ethiopia (2.3 m.y. old). P.
aethiopicus is similarto A. afarensisbut differsin its forward placed cheek bones and teeth dimensions that
anticipatelaterrobust species.
Remains of Paranthropusboisei, one of the later
robust species, have been discovered at many sites
throughouteast Africa.Paranthropusrobustushas been
found in manyof the cavesites of SouthAfrica.The two
species differonly in degree, with P. boiseiconsidered
"hyperrobust."
Theyseem to be geographicalvariantsof
closely related forms. These later robust species date
from 2 to 1.2 m.y.a..Both exhibit the cranialtraitsthat
allowed tremendousforce to be applied by the cheek
teeth (premolars and molars) during chewing. Their
mandibleswere largeand, like Paranthropusaethiopicus,
they had extensive attachmentsfor chewing muscles
(e.g., the sagittalcrest).The largecheek teeth and skull
bones contrastwith their stout but small bodies. There
arefew limb bones for these forms,but in body proportions they were similar to Australopithecusafricanus.
They are found mainly in deposits of former open,
bushy grasslands.
Early Homo
m.y.a. (Wood & Richmond, 2000). H. habilis,which
means "handyman,"was originallyassumed to be the
first stone tool maker as the name implies. There is,
however,no unequivocalevidence that H. habilismade
stone tools. There is also some question as to which
genus H. habilis should be assigned, either Homo or
Australopithecus.In general this species has a slightly
largercraniumand narrowerteeth. But its long arms
and short legs resembleaustralopithsand, thus, it may
not belong in the genus Homo.
In addition,variationin the fossils assigned to this
groupmaybe too greatto comprisea single species and
a subgroupof these specimenshave been reassignedto
the species Homo rudolfensis.Againit is unclearto which
genus this new species will eventually be assigned.
Some authoritiessuggest that it be assigned to the new
genus Kenyanthropus, based on similarities to
Kenyanthropusplatyops.H. rudolfensisremainshavebeen
found in Tanzania,Kenya,and Malawi.KNM-ER1470,
the code numberof the most famousH. rudolfensiscranium, is the best known of these fossils, and, like H.
habilis,is intermediatein form between australopiths
and laterhumans.It has a largebrainand relativelyflat
face but the enlargedcheek teeth and some facialfeatures are typicalof robust hominins.Thereare no limb
bones for this species nor has a specific habitat been
identifiedfor eitherH. habilis or H. rudolfensis.
The first species to have approximatelythe same
size and limb proportionsas modern humans is Homo
erectus.The morphologyof this species reflectsa longrangebipedaladaptationto dryer,open grasslandsand
variablehabitats.Fossilsof H. erectushavebeen foundat
numerous sites in Africa,Asia (Wood & Richmond,
2000), and the edge of Europeas shown by two discoveries near Dmanisi, Georgia (Gabunia et al., 2000;
Vekuael al., 2002). Some authoritiesrecognizea related
mostly African(and Dmanisi) species, Homo ergaster,
that firstappearsbetween 1.9-1.7m.y.a..H. ergasterpresumably migrated from Africa soon after its origin,
spreadingmostly to Asia and eventuallybecoming H.
erectus.AsianH. erectusmay have survivedin Indonesia
to as recentlyas 40,000 yearsago.
Both H. ergasterand H. erectusshare a largerbrain,
smaller dentition, a less robust jawbone, a shortened
face, and a largebrowridge(Klein, 1999). Homo erectus
differs from H. ergaster by possessing a shorter, less
domed cranium,thickercranialbones, sagittalthickening (keel), and more projectingbrowridges.Some paleoanthropologists do not consider these differences
enough to warrantseparatespecies.
Later Homo
Homo habilis remainshave been found in Tanzania,
Ethiopia, and Kenya, from deposits dated to 2.4-1.6
Discoveriesin Italy and Spain tentativelyassigned
to Homo antecessor are dated to 700,000 and 600,000
HUMAN
EVOLUTION
337
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
years ago, respectively.They provide evidence of an
earlyentry into Europeof people intermediatein form
between H. erectusand later Homo heidelbergensis.
The
species Homo heidelbergensis
(or ArchaicHomosapiens)
describes hominins less than 600,000 years old in
Africa,Europe,and Asia (Wood & Richmond,2000).
This group of fossils differsfrom Homosapiensin the
heavierbuild of the body and cranium.
Homoneanderthalensis
is a relativelyhomogeneous
group datingbetween 250,000 and 29,000 yearsago. It
is representedby many fossils from all over Europe
(excluding Scandinavia), and in southwestern and
western Asia (Klein, 1999; Hoss, 2000). H. neanderthalensis
had largedouble-archedbrow ridges,a projecting face, especially large nose, a weak chin, and
brains largerthan modern humans. Theirbodies were
thickset,hands and feet broad,and their limbs exhibited largemuscle attachments.The analysisof mitochondrialDNA(mtDNA)recoveredfromNeanderthalbones
and comparedto mtDNA of living Homosapienssupwas a
ports the conclusion that Homoneanderthalensis
distinct species from modern humans (Krings et al.,
1997; Ovchinnikovet al., 2000).
The Moderns
At some point between 200,000 and 100,000 years
ago, a populationof earlyhumans in Africacrossed the
morphologicalthreshold to fully modern humans.The
timingof this watershedevent is supportedby a variety
of genetic studies (Cavalli-Sforza,1998). These same
studies estimatethe number of individualsin this population to be from20,000 to as few as 2,000 individuals
(Harpending, 1998). A population of two thousand
individualsis about the size of a large high school in
Americatoday.
It challenges the imagination to understand that
those two thousand individualsare the ancestorsto all
six billion plus living human beings. What a stunning
moment in time to think of those two thousand individuals poised on the brink of a brave new world. In
looking back to this moment we can only wonderwhat
our small band of ancestorsmight think of our world
today.
Because of limited space and the accelerating
growth of informationabout the originof fullymodern
humans,we stop our story here at the thresholdof our
even as paleoanthropologistsshuffle species names to
accommodatethese new discoveries,the generaloutline
of human evolutionremainssturdy.The astrophysicist
James E. Peebles has suggested that rapidly changing
sciences, like astronomyand paleoanthropology,are a
sign of healthyactivity.Shiftsin opinion arenot a reflection of some inherent weakness, "... rather it shows the
subjectin a healthystate of chaos arounda slowlygrowing fixed framework.Confusion is a sign that we are
doing something right;it is the fertilecommotion of a
constructionsite."(Peebles,2001, p. 55)
It is highly unlikelythat the generalframeworkwe
have portrayedfor human evolutionwill changein the
near future,this in spite of the factthat the cast of characters will surely expand with new discoveries, and
paleoanthropologistswill surely readjust genus and
species names to reflect our growing knowledge.And
that is good news, for it reflects the healthy chaos of
Peeble'sbusy constructionsite. By the same token, it is
the broad frameworkof human evolution that every
biology student should learn and not a long list of frustratingnames.Learningthe scientificstory of our origin
should leave students with a sense of anticipationfor
furtherdiscoveriesthat will fill in the missing gaps in
our knowledgeand,in so doing,add furthersupportsto
the alreadysturdy frameworkof our understandingof
human evolution.
Recommended Books
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (2000). Genes, Peoples, and Languages.
New York:North StarPress.(One of the most important
popular books on human evolutionarygenetics brings
the story of human evolutionup to the present.)
Johanson,D., & Edgar,B. (1996). FromLucyto Language.
New
York:Simon& Schuster.(Althoughsomewhatdated,this
book includes DavidBull's stunningphotographsof the
world'smost importanthumanfossils.)
Klein, R. G. (1999). The Human Career:Human Biologicaland
Cultural Origins, 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of
ChicagoPress.(Klein'sbook, recentlyupdated,is one of
the most cited and importantbooks on humanevolution.
It is somewhattechnicalbut providesa completeand balancedview of humanevolution.)
Olson, S. (2002). MappingHuman History:Discoveringthe Past
ThroughOur Genes.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.(Olson
gives an excellent account of recent genetic studies on
humanevolution.)
Tattersall, I., & Schwartz, J. (2000). Extinct Humans. New
species.
York:WestviewPress.(Thisbook givesan overviewof the
complexityof humanevolutionand includesmagnificent
photographsof humanfossils by Schwartz.)
Summary
New fossil discoveries of our early ancestors are
occurringat an increasingrate, each with new names
and claims of direct ancestry to modern humans. But
Walker, A., & Shipman, P. (1996). The Wisdom of the Bones.
New York:Knopf (This is one of the best firsthandpopular accountsof paleoanthropologyby one of its leading
practitioners.)
338 THE
AMERICAN
BIOLOGY
TEACHER,VOLUME
MAY
65,NO.5,
2003
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Recommended Web Sites
BecomingHuman by The Institutefor HumanOrigins,
ArizonaStateUniversity,Tempe,AZ:
http://www.becominghuman.org!
Fossil Hominids: The Evidencefor Human Evolutionin The Talk
OriginsArchive:http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/
The Human Origins Programat the SmithsonianInstitution:
http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/
The HominidJourney by RichardEfflandand Ken Costello,
Departmentof Anthropology,MesaCommunityCollege,
Mesa,AZ:http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/Preffland/
anthropology/learning/origins/homindVourney/
index.html
References
Agnew,N., & Demas, M. (1998). Preservingthe Laetolifootprints.ScientificAmerican, 279(March), 44-55.
Asfaw,B., White, T., Lovejoy,O., Latimer,B., Simpson, S. &
Suwa,G. (1999). Australopithecusgarhi: A new species of
earlyhominid fromEthiopia.Science, 284, 629-635.
Brunet,M., Guy, F., Pilbeam,D., Mackaye,H. T., Likius,A.,
Ahounta,D., Beauvilain,A., Blondel,C., Bocherensk,H.,
Boisserie,J.,De Bonis,L.,Coppens,Y.,Dejax,J.,Denys,C.,
Duringerq, P., Eisenmann, V., Fanone, G., Fronty, P.,
Geraads, D., Lehmann, T., Lihoreau,F., Louchart,A.,
Mahamat,A., Merceron,G., Mouchelin, G., Otero, O.,
Campomanes, P. P., Ponce De Leon, M., Rage, J.,
Sapanetkk, M., Schusterq, M., Sudrek, J., Tassy, P.,
Valentin,X.,Vignaud,P.,Viriot,L.,Zazzo,A. & Zollikofer,
C. (2002). A new hominid from the upper Miocene of
Chad,CentralAfrica.Nature, 418(Julyll), 145-151.
L. L. (1998). The DNArevolutionin population
Cavalli-Sforza,
genetics.Trendsin Genetics, 14(February),60-65.
Coppens, Y. (1999). Introduction. In T.G. Bromage &
Schrenk,F. (Eds.), African Biogeography,Climate Change,
& Human Evolution, (pp. 13-18). New York: Oxford
UniversityPress.
Foley,R. (1999). Evolutionarygeographyof PlioceneAfrican
hominids. In T.G.Bromage& Schrenk,F. (Eds.),African
Biogeography,Climate Change, & Human Evolution, (pp.
328-348). New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Gabunia,L., Vekua,A., Lordkipanidze,D., SwisherIII,C. C.,
Ferring,R.,Justus,A., Nioradze,M.,Tvalchrelidze,M., C.
Anton, S. C., Bosinski, G., Jo ris, O., de Lumley,M.,
Majsuradze,G. & Mouskhelishvili,A. (2000). Earliest
Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi,
Republicof Georgia:Taxonomy,geological setting, and
age. Science,288, 1019-1025.
ancientdemography.Proceedingsof the National Academy
of Science USA, 95, 1961-1967.
Heinzelin,J., Clark,J. D., White, T., Hart, W., Renne, P.,
WoldeGabriel, G., Beyene, Y. & Vrba, E. (1999).
Environmentand behaviorof 2.5-million-year-old
Bouri
hominids.Science,284, 625-629.
Hoss, M. (2000). Neanderthalpopulation genetics. Nature,
404, 453454.
Klein,R. G. (1999). The Human Career:Human Biologicaland
Cultural Origins, 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of
ChicagoPress.
Krings,M., Stone,A. SchmitzR.,Krainitzki,W. H., Stoneking,
M.& Pa a bo, S. (1997). NeandertalDNAsequencesand
the originsof modernhumans.Cell,90(1), 19-30.
Leakey,M. G., Spoor,F., Brown,F. H., Gathogo,P. N., Kiarie,
C., Leakey,L. N. & McDougall,1. (2001). New hominin
genus fromeasternAfricashows diversemiddle Pliocene
lineages.Nature, 410, 433440.
Lieberman,D.E. (2001). Another face in our family tree.
Nature, 410, 419420.
Ovchinnikov. I. V., Gotherstrom, A., Romanova, G.,
Kharitonov,V. M., Liden, K. & Goodwin, W. (2000).
Molecularanalysisof NeanderthalDNA from the northern Caucasus.Nature, 404, 490-493.
Peebles, P. J. (2001). Making sense of modern cosmology.
ScientificAmerican, (January),54-55.
Poirier,F.E., & McKee,J.K. (1999). Understanding Human
Evolution,4th ed. UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:PrenticeHall.
Senut,B., Pickford,M., Gommery,D., Mein,P.,Cheboi,K. &
Coppen, Y. (2001). First hominid from the Miocene
(Lukeino Formation, Kenya). Comptes Rendus de
l'Academiedes Sciences, Earth and Planetary Sciences, 332,
137-144.
Stern,Jr.,J.T.(2000). Climbingto the top:a personalmemoir
of Australopithecus afarensis. Evolutionary Anthropology
9(3), 113-133.
Tattersall,I., & Schwartz,J. (2000). Extinct Humans. New
York:WestviewPress.
Vekua,A., Lordkipanidze,Rightmire,G. P.,Agusti,J., Ferring,
R., Maisuradze,G., Mouskhelishvili,A., Nioradze, M.,
Ponce de Leon, M.,Tappen,M., MerabTvalchrelidze,M.
& Zollikofer,C. (2002). A New Skullof EarlyHomo from
Dmanisi,Georgia.Science,297(july 5), 85-89.
Ward,C., Leakey,M.,& Walker,A. (1999). The new hominid
species Australopithecus anamensis. Evolutionary
Anthropology,7(6), 197-205.
Wolpoff,M. H. (1999). Paleoanthropology,2nd ed. New York:
McGrawHill.
Haile-Selassie,Y. (2001). Late Miocene hominids from the
MiddleAwash,Ethiopia.Nature, 412, 178-181.
Wood, B., & Collard,M. (1999). The HumanGenus.Science,
284, 65-71.
Harpending,H. C., Batzer,M. A., Gurven,M., Jorde, L. B.,
Rogers,A R. & Sherry,S. T. (1998). Genetic traces of
Wood,B.,& Richmond,B.G.(2000). Humanevolution:taxonomy andpaleobiology.
Journalof Anatomy196(Pt.1), 19-60.
339
HUMAN
EVOLUTION
This content downloaded from 140.160.178.72 on Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:38:04 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions