It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
To understand human evolution it is critical to clarify which adaptations enabled our colonisation of novel ecological niches. For any species climate is a fundamental source of environmental stress during range expansion. Mammalian climatic adaptations include changes in size and shape reflected in skeletal dimensions and humans fit general primate ecogeographic patterns. It remains unclear however, whether there are also comparable amounts of adaptation in humans, which has implications for understanding the relative importance of biological/behavioural mechanisms in human evolution. We compare cranial variation between prehistoric human populations from throughout Japan and ecologically comparable groups of macaques. We compare amounts of intraspecific variation and covariation between cranial shape and ecological variables. Given equal rates and sufficient time for adaptation for both groups, human conservation of non-human primate adaptation should result in comparable variation and patterns of covariation in both species. In fact, we find similar amounts of intraspecific variation in both species, but no covariation between shape and climate in humans, contrasting with strong covariation in macaques. The lack of covariation in humans may suggest a disconnect in climatic adaptation strategies from other primates. We suggest this is due to the importance of human behavioural adaptations, which act as a buffer from climatic stress and were likely key to our evolutionary success.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details


1 PAVE research group, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Pembroke Street, Cambridge, UK; Human Origins Research Group, Department of Earth Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, UK; Department of Anthropology, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA
2 School of Natural Science and Psychology, Liverpool John Moores University, James Parsons Building, Byrom Street, Liverpool, UK
3 Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Inuyama, Aichi, Japan
4 Institute of Archaeology, University College London, 31-4 Gordon Square, London, UK; Human Origins Research Group, Department of Earth Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, UK
5 PAVE research group, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, Pembroke Street, Cambridge, UK; Department of Anthropology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Department of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Kahlaische Strasse 10, Jena, Germany