Adaptation and Human Variation Blogs

The environmental stress I have decided to write about, is High Altitude, and how the human body adapts to that environmental change. There are two major kinds of environmental stresses at high altitude for humans.  First, there are the alternating daily extremes of climate that often range from hot, sunburning days to freezing nights.  In addition, winds are often strong and humidity low, resulting in rapid dehydration.  Second, the air pressure is lower.  This is usually the most significant limiting factor in high mountain regions. At first, the short term affects can be quite detrimental to human health, things like hypoxia and altitude sickness. The way we adapt to the higher altitude in the short term is by increasing our breathing rate, our heart rate, which maintains the oxygen flow to our brain, both of which are more stressful on the body. The facultative or medium time frame adaptation occurs when the body starts producing more red blood cells and capillaries to carry more oxygen through the body, allowing for less work of the heart. The lungs also increase in size allowing for more oxygen to be transferred into the bloodstream. 

Some developmental changes would occur when someone decided to live in the mountains for an extended period of time and start a family in the high altitude allowing the individuals offspring to keep those adaptations, however, it would not become a GENETIC difference within the populous. As far as the cultural adaptations go, the society in the mountains would be centered on teaching its members to survive in high altitude environments by showing them how to build shelters to stay warm, maybe how to hunt, but more importantly, how to control their breathing. 



The benefit to studying the different people's responses to higher elevation may help people understand the risks, and how to treat elevation related illnesses, understanding athletic advantages/disadvantages, and discovering and understanding the medicinal purposes/remedies found in the higher altitudes.



I personally wouldn't use racial factors to understand the way human beings adapt to elevation, at least initially. I would take a diverse group of people from any given area (not exposed to higher elevations) and I would put them in an area where the elevation is high, (i.e. the Sierras, the Rockies, The Grand Tetons, etc.) and would document the details of who adapted the quickest, basically turn it into "an acclimation race" only after the results would I classify my participants by "race," and even then the results would only show who was born with the genetic disposition for high altitude living.

Non-Verbal Communication vs. Verbal Communication

1.            I found this portion of the project difficult because I’m a bit of a talker, so staying silent for 15 minutes was a bit of a challenge for me.

2.            The initial impression of my lack of any established form of communication, was that I was eavesdropping or perhaps "not all there in the head" but after my initial responses (as dictated by the prompt) and silent participation that changed. Yes, they admitted altering their communication with me. They felt obligated to make sure I was included in the conversation. They would catch themselves only making eye contact with each other, then would stop and bring me back into the conversation. At some point it turned into a short game of charades! I was trying to communicate and they were guessing at the different signals I was using. I think overall it was more challenging to them.

3.            I can say that the culture using symbolic communication would definitely have the advantage in communicating more complex ideas. The culture using the Language system would most likely view the non-speaking culture as inferior or less intelligent. There are people who have difficulties communicating, people like the deaf, mutes, and even the lower functioning mentally handicapped individuals, and society, while it is improving, has a tendency to treat individuals like this with some form of innate hostility.

1.            Unfortunately, I wasn't able to last the full 15 minutes, as I happen to be a very animated communicator, it was basically impossible for me to be expressionless.

2.            The other participants in this portion of the project thought it was amusing to watch me attempt to conceal my expressions.

3.            I would say that expression and speech go hand in hand, as expression allows those you are communicating with better understand your perspective.

4.            I know of a few people who misread, or misinterpret, body language and respond accordingly. That “handicap,” if you will, can create agitation and sometimes aggression from the one communicating. Reading body language as an adaptive ability can ease tensions in situations of unrest and potential turmoil. But imagine a world without body language, where we are only judged by what we say or what we do, and not by what we do while speaking, that would be a much simpler world, it would either be a “more polite” society, or a society of chaos, people would focus MORE on what comes out of their mouth and how people heard them, and not how people perceived their movements. It’s actually quite frightening to think of a world of expressionless communication as you would never know what someone was trying to convey.

Piltdown Hoax

The original “Piltdown Man” bones were discovered in 1912 by Charles Dawson in a gravel pit in a small town of the same name in England. Dawson claimed they were an ancient human ancestor. His story and find were corroborated by a few of the “world’s leading minds” in the field of paleontology and archaeology at the time. Which naturally meant that nobody questioned them until AFTER their deaths. The effects of the “Piltdown Man” discovery were extremely influential to the scientific community, until they started finding other human ancestor fossils in other regions of the world, fossils that didn’t match the find in England. The fossils found in the other parts of the world in the 1920’s, caused the questioning of the Piltdown Man’s credibility, which led to scientists examining the find more closely. Thy were finally able to debunk the claim in 1949 shortly after WW2 with Fluorine Testing, and further research was conducted in the 50’s and 60’s with carbon dating. Modern Dating Methods (in the 1940’s and 1950’s), such as fluorine testing and carbon dating, were responsible for discovering the facts about the true age and origins of the bone fragments. The hoax was completely disproven in the mid 1990’s when they found a chest full of “modern tools” belonging to one of the men involved in the find. Would it be possible to remove the human factor from the research aspect of fossil classification? I suppose so, by replacing “us” with a computer system that can analyze any fossil specimens completely and accurately providing only factual data unlaced with any human speculation, but the human presence still needs to be present in order to retrieve the specimens from their original resting place. The biggest human fault present in this hoax was Hubris or Pride, the men that discovered these bone fragments wanted so badly to be recognized in the scientific community that they sacrificed their integrity and ultimately their credibility to do so. The Lesson here for everyone to learn is “Do not believe the first thing you hear unless verified or corroborated by a CREDIBLE source” and even scientists can be wrong sometimes as well.

Primates and their Dietary habits

I am going to tell you about these primates’ dietary habits and food choices. But first in order to understand why they eat the way that they do, you need to be aware of where they live in the wild.

Lemurs are fascinating little tree dwellers, or arboreal primates, that thrive in dense jungles and rainforests. They are social animals that live in large groups, sometimes containing more than 100 “members”. The Ring-tailed Lemur of Madagascar is by far the most recognizable Lemur species, recently made famous by the Animated “Madagascar” films. Lemurs are omnivorous meaning they will eat Fruit, and Insects (great source of protein).

Another arboreal primate is the Spider Monkey, including probably one of the “cuter” species of monkey, the Capuchin (as seen below), they live in the rain-forests of Central and South America, with some species also being found as far north as Mexico. They can also be pets (with proper permits and licensing in most states) since most Spider Monkeys are no bigger than a house cat and they have a calm disposition. Their diet consists primarily of Fruits, Nuts and Seeds, but they have been known to dabble in the “Meat Department” partaking in bird eggs, spiders, bugs, and bug larvae. Once in a while, spider monkeys also feed on smaller reptiles as a major source of protein.

Baboons, on the other hand, are primarily land dwellers, living on the savannas of the Serengeti and in parts of the Arabian Peninsula, they are, however, just as comfortable within a jungle environment. These primates are very social creatures, and have an incredible ability to create and maintain an established hierarchy within their clans or “troops” which are led by either a single Alpha Male or Multiple Dominant Males, in situations of Multiple Dominant Males the males are typically brothers.

These primates are omnivores, existing on a diet of worms, insects, reptiles, crabs, small mammals (pictured below), fruits, vegetation, and eggs. Sometimes they will even eat rocks rich in minerals like sodium and magnesium, in order to receive the necessary amounts required for their bodies to function.

 

The Gibbon is medium in size and is the fastest of all of the tree dwelling mammals. They are found in the dense jungles of Eastern India and Southeast Asia. Like all primates they are omnivores, but their primary food source is fruit and vegetables. They also eat foliage and will occasionally eat insects and bird eggs.

                The best known primate on this list is the Chimpanzee. Chimpanzees live in Africa territories range from the Ivory Coast in Western Africa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo in Central Africa to Southern Sudan in Eastern Africa. The areas they live in range from Savanna Woodlands dense pockets of trees in the grasslands of the Sahara, dense jungle (Congo), and High Altitude Forests called Montane Forests or Cloud Forests. Another omnivore with a primary diet of fruits, seeds, nuts, flower blossoms and leaves. They eat insects and will also hunt and kill larger prey such as deer or other wild game. These animals are incredibly intelligent, highly social, and possess strong family values, they are very protective of their families, especially their young.

 

All of these animals live in the temperate regions of the world where fruit and vegetation is bountiful, which also would attract these animals’ live prey as well. I think it’s safe to say that their physical environment is a direct factor in their dietary patterns and habits. Since social patterns do not reflect in dietary choices, I don’t feel that their social environments are a factor when it comes to what they eat. All of these animals are relatively high on the local food chains as well, most likely due to their levels of intelligence among other things.

Regardless of location on the planet, I found that the diets of these Primates are quite similar. The exact dietary choices may differ strictly based on the regions they live in, but their food types (fruits, vegetation, even their protein sources) are BASICALLY the same, which tells me one thing that all of these animals could survive in at least one of the others’ habitats, if they were forced to do so.

Homologous Traits vs. Analogous Traits

The Species I have decided to use as examples of Homologous Traits are the Pig and Hippopotamus. The Domestic Pig is a cousin to Wild Boar and Warthogs and they are fairly resilient creatures and are the source of one of the greatest things ever, Bacon!! The other is FAR larger and much more dangerous, The Hippopotamus, this big animal is amphibious, spending most of its time in the water in order to support its immense weight and is actually more closely related to whales.

Both animals possess 4 toes on each foot and are part of a group of animals called "even toed ungulates" meaning they have an even number of toes (2, 4, 6...) Camels are also members of this animal group. The difference between a Pig's foot and a Hippo's foot is that, the Hippo's foot is webbed in order to allow it to move around the water with ease. While the Pigs's foot is not, allowing it to dig for food sources (roots, worms, bugs, etc.) and traverse dry land. The structural differences in their feet are present due to the type of terrain these animals spend most of their time in.

The only similarity between these 2 animals is the fact that they are both Artiodactyls (or animals with hoofed feet) which proves common ancestry.
(Other than the classification of the 2 I cannot find any information on what animal the common ancestor is)

For more information regarding Artiodactyls visit:
http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/accounts/Artiodactyla/


I have decided to choose Seals and Sharks. Seals (along with Sea Lions and ALL of their cousins) are Aquatic Mammals that spend a majority of their lifetime in the water only spending time on land to mate, sleep and birth their young. While Sharks are members of the fish world they live their entire life in the water without any exceptions.

The analogous trait between these two animals is their fins located on the sides of their bodies (where the arms would be). The similarities between their fins are location along the body and their function. These animals' fins allow them to navigate through the water with minimal resistance. The differences between the two are their range of motion, a seals fins operate more like a birds wings do helping it propel itself through the water, while the sharks fins have minimal mobility more like the flaps on the wing of an airplane, affecting their trajectory and not their speed.

I am not sure how a common ancestry is possible with the 2 animals being from different animal families (Fish vs. Mammals). But I can say that if they did have a common ancestor it would have lived in the water, and yes it would have possessed this trait.

GCTATACTTGTCTGAAAGCACCGGCATACCCAGTACCGCTATATCAAGTTTAATCGCTT

ACGTTACTTGTAAGAGCCTAATCACGGTAGTGGCTATACGTATATCCGCT

Historical Influences on Darwin - Assignment

I have decided to write about Alfred Wallace, because of his positive influence on Charles Darwin. Alfred Wallace is the reason "The Origin of Species" was published because Darwin was afraid the Wallace would attempt to publish his own findings first, he also collaborated with Darwin by submitting personal notes and other hypotheses to assist him in his publishing of the "Origin of Species" including his paper "On the Tendencies of Varieties to Depart Indefinitely from the Original Type" which described his views that evolution was a process driven by competition and natural selection (Text pg.38)

His biggest contribution to modern science would probably be his proposal of Intelligent Evolution, basically compromising the Creation Theory and Evolution Theory, saying that a far more intelligent being was behind the evolutionary process. He is also listed as one of the co-founders of bio-geography. (http://www.alfredwallace.org/faqs)

Darwin reinforced Wallace's idea that organisms with the ability to adapt to the environment had a better chance of survival and procreation leading to further evolution and adaptation of specific genetic lineages, using the peppered moth as an example. the lighter colored moths surviving longer than the darker ones, and then ultimately reversing when the dust from the coal changed the environment allowing the darker ones to survive longer. (Addressing the "Who gets better access to these limited resources?" bullet point)

Darwin developed his theory free of Wallace's influence, since they both proposed their individual theories and ideas around the same time, he just built on Wallace's ideas after their collaboration by compiling both of their research and supplying more of his own findings from his observations of finches in the Galapagos islands.
(Textbook pg. 38)


Naturally, the church was unhappy about Charles Darwin proposing the idea of evolution, which challenged their teachings that "God created everything the way it was and nothing had changed since the day of creation", by saying that evolution and natural selection caused plants, animals, and people to adapt and change to better survive in their environment basically said that they were wrong and History shows that the Church condemns those who disagree with or challenges what they say, there was no further affect on the publication of his book until AFTER it was printed, as the book states, "...public opinion was negative, but there was much scholarly praise for the book, and scientific opinion gradually came to Darwin's support..." My research was fruitless in attempting to discover the actual affect the Church's position had on him personally.
(http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/darwin-and-his-theory-of-evolution/)