PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB - WEEK 9 PRE-LAB 9 Review VL #7: Review all of section I on the geological record, geological time scale, dating methods, and fossils. You should be familiar with all the dating methods described as you will need to apply these in your lab reports for weeks 12-15. Under Section II Phylogeny understand how cladograms are constructed (this will take you back to some terms learned earlier in the course). Note the ways different primate taxa are related based on derived, versus primitive traits. Examine both of the contending systems for classification (strepsyrhine/haplorhine & prosimian/anthropoid). Many of these difficult taxa names are pronounced for you. Understand the arguments for each of these two systems. Quickly review Section III on Fossil Primates; be sure to access the phylogenies and time lines (click the icons). Each of the epochs and related fossils will be discussed in lecture; although this is a very long section, a preview of these fossils will help you to follow the lecture. The pre-lab assignment below is due week 9, but will be credited week 10. Your in-lab work on identification of bones and features of the human skeleton will constitute your entire lab grade. Do the two laboratory exercises in VL #7, (Miocene hominoid phylogeny and Dryopithecine intermembral index). You can learn about cladistic terminology (apomorphy, homology, homoplasy, plesiomorphy, symplesiomorphy, synapomorphy) doing a search for "cladistic terminology." Miocene hominoid phylogeny: Select the features for the following species and fill in the chart:

SIVAPITHECUS

PONGO

HYLOBATES

VICTORIAPITHECUS

ORBIT SHAPE

INTERORBITAL BREADTH

ZYGOMATIC

Which taxa are more closely related? Why is it necessary to use synapomorphies to establish this relationship? Explain.

Continued…..

PRE-LAB 9 Dryopithecus: Measure the chimpanzee and baboon limbs. Were your measurements correct? If not, repeat your measurements. You are given the intermembral index for Dryopithecus. Using these data formulate a hypothesis for the locomotor behavior of Dryopithecus (no deductions for being wrong!): ___________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________ Plot with the data for the chimpanzee, baboon, and Dryopithecus (use C for chimp, B for baboon, D for Dryopithecus). Body Mass

Body Mass State whether your hypothesis was upheld and identify the probable locomotor pattern of Dryopithecus. ___________ _______________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________

Inte

rmem

bral

lnde

x

S = suspensory T = terrestrial A = arboreal V = vertical clinging & leaping

LAB 9—HUMAN OSTEOLOGY (TO BE DONE IN LAB) PART 1 – IDENTIFICATION OF THE HUMAN SKELETON For the rest of this course we will be studying hominid evolution. Specific bones and features will frequently be referred to in lecture as we discuss the characteristics of our human ancestors. You will be expected to be familiar with these terms in order to follow the lectures. The objective of this lab is to prepare you with this knowledge and familiarity with the human skeleton. How many bones are in the human body? 206 ! Using the diagrams provided and the articulated skeletons for reference, identify the following human bones (with number) or features of bones (with letters) Do NOT rush this identification—there will be an identification quiz that requires you to identify and name various bones and their features. Do NOT simply look at numbers--be familiar with the shape of the bone, i.g., on the skull bones, note the extent of each by following the suture lines on the skull. Try to fit bones together to see how they articulate (i.g., the humerus and radius, etc.). Identify which side of the body the bones (femur, tibia, fibula, humerus, ulna, radius, scapula, pelvis) belong to (indicate "L" or "R"). Note how the muscles attach to the bones. Know all the bones and features for a bone identification quiz during Week 11 lab. You will be given 20 bones and features that you will have to identify and spell correctly. There may be an open lab prior to the exam for review of the osteological materials. You can also study on the internet: http://www-personal.une.edu.au/%7Epbrown3/skeleton.pdf The Human Skeleton – excellent illustrations and labels http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/biology/humananatomy/skeletal/skeletalsystem.html The Skeletal System http://www.eskeletons.org/ The Skeletons Project (select bones, then “Launch Bone Viewer”) http://medstat.med.utah.edu/kw/osteo/osteology/ See especially, The Skull and The Postcranial Skeleton http://www.csuchico.edu/tlp/info/projects/skull/ Interactive 3-D Skull Module http://www.crnasomeday.com/anatpages/skull.htm Skull (anterior, posterior, lateral, and inferior views, labeled) http://education.yahoo.com/reference/gray/ Gray’s Anatomy (see Osteology and click the bones you want to view) http://www.jburroughs.org/science/resources/skeleton/skeletontitle.html The Human Skeleton; Click Student Tutorial A few words on handling skeletal materials--they are FRAGILE and EXPENSIVE. Please handle them with care. Skulls are not bowling balls! Refrain from inserting your fingers into the eyes, foramen magnum, or using the zygomatic as a handle when picking them up. Teeth are easily broken off, so do not snap the teeth together. Please take care not to mark the bones with your pen/pencil. Before picking up any bone, you must lay down your pencil/pen. Do not use writing instruments to point at the bones. Pen and pencil marks can not be removed.

LAB 9 Note: Bones are labeled with numbers; bone features are labeled with letters.

SKULL:

OTHER POST-CRANIAL BONES:

1 16 2 17 3 18 4 19 5 20 6 21 7 22 (L OR R) a w b x c y d 23 (L OR R) e z f 24 (L OR R) g 25 (L OR R) h aa i bb j 26 (L OR R) k cc PELVIS: INDICATE “A” OR “B” ON #8, & #22-27 dd 8 (L OR R) ee 9 ff 10 27 (L OR R) l gg m 28 n hh o HAND: p 29 VERTEBRAL COLUMN: HOW MANY ARE THERE? 11 30 12 HOW MANY ARE THERE? 13 31 HOW MANY ARE THERE? HOW MANY ARE THERE? 14 FOOT: HOW MANY ARE THERE? 32

15 HOW MANY ARE THERE? (INCLUDES #35) HOW MANY ARE THERE? 33 q HOW MANY ARE THERE? r 34 s HOW MANY ARE THERE? t 35 u M1 v M2

Manubrium

Frontal Supraorbital torus Nasal Zygomatic Maxilla Parietal Mandible Frontal Supraorbital torus Nasal Maxilla Zygomatic Maxilla Mandible Temporal Zygomatic arch Ascending raumus Ascending ramus Mastoid process Occipital condyles Foramen magnum Occipital

Coronal Suture Sagittal Suture Lambdoidal Suture Mandibular Condyle Coronoid Process

Sacrum Sacro-iliac joint

Innominate (pelvic bone)

Ilium

Acetabulum

Obturator foramen

Ischium Pubic symphysis Pubis

Left pelvic bone lateral view

Acetabulum

Greater sciatic notch

Lesser sciatic notch

Ischium Obturator foramen

Pubis

Ilium

Iliac crest

Cervical Vertebrae

Transverse

foramen only in cervical

Thoracic Vertebrae

Transverse

costal facets for

articulation with ribs

Lumbar Vertebrae

No costal

facets Spinous

process is large,

horizontal

Vertebral foramen

Spinous process

Transverse process

Transverse foramen

Superior costal facet

Transverse costal facet

Spinous process

Transverse process

Body

Transverse process

Spinous process

Atlas No body, no spinous process Axis

Transverse foramen

Transverse process

Vertebral foramen

Dens epistropheus (pivot for atlas)

Transverse foramen

Transverse process

LEFT

R

AD

IUS

LEFT

U

LNA

Styl

oid

proc

ess

Ole

cran

on

LEFT

HU

MER

US

AN

TER

IOR

VIE

W

POST

ERIO

R V

IEW

Rig

ht

Styl

oid

Proc

ess

Fove

a ca

pitu

s H

ead

Line

a as

pera

Rig

ht

Rig

ht F

emur

A

nter

ior

View

Po

ster

ior

View

Ant

erio

r Vi

ew

Right Scapula

Carpal Bones

Tarsal Bones

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLGY LAB – WEEK 10

PRE-LAB 10 Your pre-lab assignment this week is to answer the following questions from the Investigating Olduvai CD. Try to limit your answers to one page total. Your work must be word-processed. 1. Read the Analysis section, Theory: Interpretive Debates, pp. 1-26. This section identifies important theorists and issues in interpreting early hominid sites that you will need to be familiar with when writing your site reports later in the course.

• Find one of the debates that you find interesting. Briefly identify 2 theorists with opposing views and state which position each of them holds on the issue.

2. In the Analysis section, read Methods: Site Formation Studies, pp. 1-27.

• Define “taphonomy” and describe one example of a taphonomic problem in interpreting hominid sites

• Briefly explain how ethno-zooarchaeology of the Hadza can be used to infer early hominid behavior

3. In the Data Base section, review Savanna Vegetation, pp. 1-9

• Define “savanna” (the predominant environment of the Great Rift Valley) 4. In the Data Base, skim through Animal Guide, pp. 1-31. For your site reports in later labs, you will need to be able to reconstruct the plant and animal life in order to interpret how early hominids may have exploited the environment at Olduvai Gorge.

• As you go through the pages, make a list of all the animal species, including category (Bovidae, Carnivora, etc.), that were present when early hominids lived at the FLK site. Note that you can list these in the notepad, copy them in any one of the questions in the fieldbook, and save them for printing when you exit the program.

LAB 10 – HUMAN OSTEOLOGY (TO BE DONE IN LAB) PART II – SEX DETERMINATION IN THE HUMAN SKELETON In this lab you will learn to distinguish sex in the human skeleton. Important conclusions concerning behavior can be inferred by knowing the sex of early hominid fossils. For example, considerations of whether the “robust” and “gracile” australopithecines were two species or simply represent sexual dimorphism raises interpretive questions about early hominid evolution. Keep in mind, though, that overall gross size does not necessarily indicate the sex of an individual. For instance, some populations are small in stature (i.g., Southeast Asians) and males could be identified as female based on gross overall size. Note that there is much variation in size among males and females in your class in terms of height and robusticity. Instead, features of the skull and pelvic bones are extremely useful in determining sex. Sex determination is also important in forensic anthropology. Forensic anthropologists are often called upon to identify sex, gender, age, and “race” in corpses. In this lab be able to distinguish:

• the male and female skull (skulls A or C and B or D) • the pelvis (I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4) and • the two articulated skeletons

Use the criteria on the next page to determine the sex of the skeletal materials provided. Fill in the chart as indicated. Be able to distinguish sex of the skull and pelvis for a quiz during Week 14 lab. You can find helpful links on sex determination at the following web sites: http://medstat.med.utah.edu/kw/osteo/forensics/sex/bonesexdet.html http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/biology/forensics/sex_determ.html

LAB 10

MALE SKULL MASTOID PROCESS IS LARGER NUCHAL CREST IS PRESENT FRONTAL BONE SLANTS BACKWARD SUPRAORBITAL TORUS IS LARGER SUPRAORBITAL RIM IS MORE BLUNT CHIN IS MORE SQUARED ZYGOMATIC ARCH IS THICKER POST-ZYGOMATIC PROCESS IS LARGER ASCENDING RAMUS IS THICKER, AT RIGHT ANGLE MANDIBLE FLARES AT THE ANGLE WITH THE ASCENDING RAMUS MALE PELVIS SUBPUBIC ANGLE IS LESS THAN 90o "RULE OF THUMB" SUBPUBIC CONCAVITY RARE NO VENTRAL ARC NARROW SCIATIC NOTCH (LESS THAN 68o) OBTURATOR FORAMEN IS OVAL SACRUM IS CURVED, NARROW PREAURICULAR SULCUS ABSENT ILIUM LESS FLARED LARGER ACETABULUM Note: innominate = pelvis + sacrum

FEMALE SKULL MASTOID PROCESS IS SMALLER NUCHAL CREST IS SMALL OR ABSENT FRONTAL BONE IS MORE GLOBULAR SUPRAORBITAL TORUS IS SMALLER SUPRAORBITAL RIM IS SHARPER CHIN IS MORE POINTED ZYGOMATIC ARCH IS THINNER POST-ZYGOMATIC PROCESS IS SMALL OR ABSENT ASCENDING RAMUS IS AT OBTUSE ANGLE MANDIBLE FLARES LESS AT THE ANGLE WITH THE ASCENDING RAMUS FEMALE PELVIS SUBPUBIC ANGLE GREATER THAN 90o "RULE OF THUMB" SUBPUBIC CONCAVITY PRESENT VENTRAL ARC PRESENT WIDE SCIATIC NOTCH (OVER THAN 68o) OBTURATOR FORAMEN IS TRIANGULAR SACRUM IS STRAIGHTER, WIDE PREAURICULAR SULCUS IS PRESENT ILIUM MORE FLARED SMALLER ACETABULUM

You may use any extra time to study the bones for the osteology quiz next week.

MALE FEMALE

MALE PELVIS FEMALE PELVIS

Subpubic Angle --Wider in females

The pre-auricular sulcus is a depression or groove between the greater sciatic notch and the sacro-iliac articulation,

found in females who have given birth.

Pre-auricular sulcus

Sacro-iliac articulation

Greater sciatic notch

Pubic symphysis

LAB 10 SKULL: Note whether the following features for each skull are decidedly male (use ♂), decidedly female (use ♀), or ambiguous (explain). Provide a brief description of each (present/absent, large/small, pronounced/little difference, shape, etc.) Refrain from simply marking the feature male or female because you already see a pattern—some features will not conform to the model and you will be expected to identify these. Make a note of those features that do not fit the pattern. Skeleton A Skeleton B Skull A or C Skull B or D Skull E Skull F Mastoid Process

Nuchal Crest

Frontal Bone

Supra- Orbital Torus

Supra- Orbital Rim

Zygomatic Arch

Chin

Post- Zygomatic Process

Ascending Ramus

Mandible

Sex? ♂ or ♀

LAB 10 INNOMINATE: Note whether the following features for each innominate are decidedly male (use ♂), decidedly female (use ♀), or ambiguous (explain). Provide a brief description of each (present/absent, wide/narrow, pronounced/little difference, shape, etc.) Refrain from simply marking the feature male or female because you already see a pattern—some features will not conform to the model and you will be expected to identify these. Make note of any features that do not fit the pattern. Skeleton A Skeleton B I-1 I-2 I-3 I-4 Subpubic Angle

Subpubic Concavity

Ventral Arc

Sciatic Notch

Obturator Foramen

Sacrum

Preauricular Sulcus

Ilium

Acetabulum

Sex? ♂ or ♀

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB –WEEK 11

PRE-LAB 11 In VIRTUAL LAB #8: Review the species gallery (the australopithecines), using the available animations, phylogeny, timeline, and map. Pay particular attention to the morphology of the skulls as they rotate in the animations. It will be helpful to study these for the fossil identification quiz during week 15 lab. No hand-in assignment this week. During weeks 14-16 you will be working intensively on the Investigating Olduvai CD. It would be advisable to begin reading sections of this CD on the interpretation of the Zinjanthropus site, as you will write your own report and analysis of the data contained in the CD. Begin by reading DATA BASE: FLK Excavation (1-13 of 13). See PRE-LAB/LAB reading assignments for week 14. There will be a bone identification quiz, worth 20 points, during lab this week.

LAB 11 – HUMAN OSTEOLOGY (TO BE DONE IN LAB)

PART III—CRANIAL MEASUREMENTS AND AGE DETERMINATION Note the following definitions: cranium: skull minus the mandible calvarium: cranium minus the face calva: calvarium minus the base Paleoanthropologists have been concerned with cranial morphology because it may suggest changes in functional reorganization of the brain through time as well as phylogenetic relationships. Neanderthals, for example, had much larger brain size than modern humans; they tended to be dolichocephalic (long-headed). See how you measure up to the Neanderthals! To take measurements, you will need some basic points of reference (see diagrams). The cranium is oriented on the Frankfort horizontal plane, which passes through 3 points, the left orbitale (lowest point on margin of eye socket), and the right and left porion (upper edge of external auditory meatus, i.e., ear). As you measure the skulls, compare your measurements with classmates for inter-observer reliability--do you get the same results? Repeat the measurements until you reach a consensus on the most accurate measurement. Indicate the number on the calipers you use. HOW TO DETERMINE THE CRANIAL INDEX: EURYON TO EURYON ___ X 100 = BREADTH X 100 GLABELLA TO OPISTHOCRANION LENGTH CALCULATE THE CRANIAL INDEX FOR SKULL #A _________________________________ CALCULATE THE CRANIAL INDEX FOR SKULL #B _________________________________ CALCULATE YOUR OWN CRANIAL INDEX ________________________________________ WHERE DO YOU FALL IN THE FOLLOWING? DOLICHOCEPHALIC (NARROW OR LONG-HEADED) UP TO 74.9 MESOCEPHALIC (AVERAGE) 75.0 - 79.9 BRACHYCEPHALIC (ROUND-HEADED) 80.0 - 84.9 HYPERBRACHYCEPHALIC (EVEN MORE ROUNDED) 85.0 AND UP CALCULATE THE CRANIAL INDEX FOR THE ORANGUTAN ______________________ CALCULATE THE CRANIAL INDEX FOR THE CHIMPANZEE ______________________ CALCULATE THE CRANIAL INDEX FOR THE FOLLOWING HOMINIDS: AUSTRALOPITHECUS _________________________________________________ HOMO ERECTUS _____________________________________________________ NEANDERTAL ________________________________________________________

LAB 11 AGE DETERMINATION While tooth eruption and wear are one of the best methods for determining age, relative age can also be assessed using suture lines of the cranium and the pubic symphysis of the innominate bone: Refer to the charts for assessment suggestions. CRANIAL SUTURES-- RANK SKULLS #A, B, E, F FROM YOUNGEST TO OLDEST: _____, _____, _____, _____ Skull A is most likely: _____ 18-21 years of age _____ 25-40 _____ 50-70 PUBIC SYMPHYSES-- WHICH INNOMINATE BONE BELONGS TO THE OLDEST INDIVIDUAL? __________ Pubic symphysis I-3 is most likely: Pubic symphysis I-4 is most likely: _____ 18-21 years of age _____ 18-21 years of age _____ 22-26 _____ 22-26 _____ 35-50 _____ 35-50 _____ over 50 _____ over 50

Age Determination of the Human Pubic Symphysis

Phase 1: Symphyseal face rugged, traversed by horizontal ridges separated by well-marked grooves, there being no distinction in size between the upper and lower ridges. None of the following structures are present: nodules fusing with the surface, a delimiting margin, or definition of extremities. (Age, 18-19)

Phase 2: Symphyseal surface still rugged. Horizontal grooves are becoming filled near their dorsal limit with new, finely textured bone. Bony nodules may be present, fusing with upper symphyseal face. Dorsal delimiting margin begins to develop. No delimitation of the extremities. Ventral bevel commences. (Age, 20-21)

Phase 3: Symphyseal face shows progressive obliteration of ridge and furrow system. Commencing formation of a dorsal platform. Bony nodules may be present. Definition of dorsal margin, with sharp lipping. Ventral bevel more pronounced. Extremities not delimited. (Age, 22-24)

Phase 4: Great increase of ventral beveled area. Corresponding diminution of ridge and furrow formation. Complete definition of dorsal margin through the formation of the dorsal platform. Commencing delimitation of lower extremity. (Age, 25-26)

Phase 5: Little change in symphyseal face and dorsal platform. Margin more clearly defined and more sharply lipped. Lower extremity better defined. Upper extremity forming with or without the intervention of a bony nodule. (Age, 27-30)

Phase 6: Increasing definition of extremities. Development and practical completion of ventral rampart. Retention of some granular appearance of symphyseal face indicating that activity has not yet ceased. Failure of ventral aspect of pubis adjacent to ventral rampart to become transformed into a compact surface. The rampart may therefore be somewhat undermined. Retention of the pectinate outline of the dorsal margin and slight ridge and furrow system. No lipping of ventral margin and no increased lipping of dorsal margin. (Age, 30-35)

Phase 7: Face and ventral aspect change from granular to fine-grained or dense bone. Slight changes in symphyseal face and marked changes in ventral aspect from diminishing activity. No formation of symphyseal rim. No ossification of tendinous and ligamentous attachments. (Age, 35-39)

Phase 8: Symphyseal face and ventral aspect of pubic bone generally smooth and inactive. Oval outline complete. Extremities clearly defined. No distinct "rim" to symphyseal face. No marked lipping of ventral or dorsal margin. Development of ossification in tendinous and ligamentous attachments, especially those of sacro-tuberous ligament and gracilis muscle. (Age, 40-45)

Phase 9: Symphyseal face presents a more or less marked rim. Dorsal margin uniformly lipped; ventral margin irregularly lipped. (Age, 45-49)

Phase 10:Ventral margin eroded at a greater or lesser extent of its length, continuing somewhat onto the symphyseal face. Rarefaction of face and irregular ossification. Disfigurement increases with age. (Age, 50 +)

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB – WEEK 12: ANCESTRAL HOMINIDS PRE-LAB 12 Your focus for pre-lab this week will be on the evolution of bipedalism. You will compare the Australopithecus afarensis pelvis and that of modern humans. Before you begin, state a hypothesis as to whether you believe evolution led to greater advantages or greater disadvantages in the mechanical structure for bipedalism from the time of A. afarensis to modern Homo sapiens (be explicit): ________________________________________________________________________________ Go through the entire menu of VL #9 (pelvis and hip joint, vertebral column, femur, and foot) and complete the lab exercise. Calculate the humerofemoral index for A. afarensis: __________________ Plot A. afarensis on the graph with an X. Plot the other locomotor patterns as indicated in the program. Note that you can highlight each locomotor type in the legend for descriptions and each plot on the graph for the primate and its index. Draw a separate circle around each of the groups that share the same locomotion.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Body Mass Explain the relationship between positional behavior and limb length (low, intermediate, high index), giving specific examples from the chart: Vertical clingers & leapers:

Arboreal Quadrupeds:

Terrestrial Quadrupeds:

Suspensory primates:

Explain the relationship between limb length and body size for the four locomotor patterns: What do the data demonstrate in regard to your hypothesis? Be specific (mention the lever system and compare mechanical advantage of Australopithecus and modern humans. Use the back of this page.

Hum

ero-

fem

oral

Inde

x

2

0 40

60

80

100

120

1

40

B = bipedal T = terrestrial A = arboreal quadruped V = vertical clinging & leaping S = suspensory X = A. Afarensis

LAB 12—FOSSIL SKULLS (TO BE DONE IN LAB)

Your lab objective this week is to examine the fossil casts of the different hominids and make observations based on your comparisons. Use the list of questions on the next four pages to focus your observations and thoughtfully, yet briefly, answer each question. Please write neatly. The chart may be used for your own reference when studying for the fossil quiz. Be familiar with each fossil for an identification quiz to be given during your Week 15 lab. Resources for studying fossils outside of lab include your Virtual Lab CD, the Physical Anthropology Resources on the Web page, and the following web links: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/species.html (click on the hominids you wish to view) http://www.wwnorton.com/college/anthro/humev/ (rotatable skulls—360 degrees; most are password-protected, a few are available) http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5579/skullduggery.html Skull Duggery – Know Your Skulls

LAB 12 PAN TROGLODYTES (CHIMPANZEE) Compare the degree of prognathism with A. afarensis: Locate the simian shelf; do you find this feature in any other fossils? Is there a canine diastema present? Do you observe this feature in any other fossils? AUSTRALOPITHECUS AFARENSIS (3-4 MYA) How does its dentition resemble or differ from the chimpanzee? In what ways is its dentition human-like? Which are larger--its front teeth or its back teeth? How does its cranial capacity differ from the chimpanzee? AUSTRALOPITHECUS AFRICANUS (2.3-3 MYA) What do you observe about the relative size of the mandible to the rest of the cranium, compared to that of A. boisei? to H. sapiens sapiens? Compare the shape of the face to A. afarensis, H. erectus, and H. sapiens sapiens:

LAB 12 AUSTRALOPITHECUS BOISEI (ZINJANTHROPUS, Olduvai Gorge, E. Africa - 2.5-1 MYA) Note differences in skull morphology between A. boisei and A. africanus: Observe the post-orbital constriction; compare this to H. erectus and H. sapiens sapiens: Is there a sagittal crest present? In what other fossils is this feature observed? Which are larger, its anterior or posterior teeth? How do its teeth differ from A. afarensis? from H. erectus? Compare the mandible and ascending ramus of A. africanus, A. boisei, and H. erectus: AUSTRALOPITHECUS ROBUSTUS (SK48, PARANTHROPUS ROBUSTUS, S. Africa – 1.5-2 MYA ) Compare this skull to A. boisei. What similarites do the two share? Which is more robust, A. robustus or A boisei? Some have renamed this species Paranthropus robustus. Are you convinced that this fossil should be given not only a different species, but a different genus name? Explain. HOMO HABILIS (OH 24, Olduvai Gorge, E. Africa; also KNM-ER 1813 - 1.85-1.6 MYA); found at same site as “Zinj.” Compare the cranium and its overall size to the Australopithecines. What differences do you note in brain size? What differences do you observe in the shape and features of the skull? What do you observe about the relative size of the front teeth to the back teeth, when compared to the Australopithecines? Compare the cranium, face, and zygomatic arch of A. afarensis, H. habilis, and H. erectus. On what basis is H. habilis placed in the genus Homo? Should this fossil be classified as an Australopithecine?

LAB 12 HOMO RUDOLFENSIS (HOMO HABILIS – Koobi Fora, Kenya – 1.8-1.9 MYA) Compare the brain size of this fossil to an Australopithecine and to Homo erectus. What significance does this difference have for the evolution of hominids? . Are there other features that distinguish H. rudolfensis from the Australpithecines? This fossil was origninally named Homo habilis. Is there justfication for separating it into a different species from H. habilis (OH 24)? Could the difference be due to sexual dimporphism? Explain. HOMO ERECTUS (PITHECANTHROPUS ERECTUS – 400,000-500,000 MYA) Does the dentition of H. erectus differ from modern humans? What do you observe about the shape of the skull relative to the Australopithecines? Where is the widest part of the skull (posterior view)? Where is the widest part of the skull in Neanderthals? in modern H. sapiens? HOMO ERGASTER (HOMO ERECTUS, KOOBI FOR A, KENYA – 1.8 MYA) Carefully compare Homo ergaster (Africa) and Homo erectus (China). How are they similar or different? The African erectus forms have been reclassified H. ergaster, retaining H. erectus for the Java and Chinese fossils. Do you find this reclassification justified? Explain. ARCHAIC HOMO SAPIENS (NEANDERTHAL) (LA CHAPELLE, FRANCE - 130,000-35,000 Y.A.) Compare the shape of the temporal bones of Neanderthal and modern H. sapiens: Compare the shape of the cranium to modern H. sapiens: Compare the occipital region to H. erectus and modern H. sapiens: Compare the chin to H. erectus and modern H. sapiens:

LAB 12 TRANSITIONAL (SKHUL V, ARCHAIC to MODERN H. SAPIENS, MT. CARMEL, ISRAEL) Are there any Neanderthal-like traits present? What characteristics differ from modern humans? In what ways is it similar to modern humans? HOMO SAPIENS SAPIENS (CRO-MAGNON - 30,000 Y.A.) What differences do you observe between Neanderthal and modern H. sapiens? HOMO SAPIENS SAPIENS - (ZHOUKOUDIAN, CHINA - 18,000-10,000) What evidence is there for trauma to this individual?

A. afarensis A. africanus A. boisei

C

him

panz

ee

A

. afri

canu

s

A

. boi

sei

H

omo

erec

tus

H. s

apie

ns n

eand

erta

lens

is

H. s

apie

ns s

apie

ns

C

him

panz

ee

A

. afri

canu

s

A

. boi

sei

H

omo

erec

tus

H. s

apie

ns n

eand

erta

lens

is

H. s

apie

ns s

apie

ns

C

him

panz

ee

A

. afri

canu

s

A

. boi

sei

H

omo

erec

tus

H. s

apie

ns n

eand

erta

lens

is

H. s

apie

ns s

apie

ns

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB – WEEK 14 PRE-LAB 14 In VL #10, review Section I, Species Gallery for the genus Homo. Be sure to click the phylogeny icon and view the alternative phylogenies--the names of the species will be pronounced for you. Familiarize yourself with the timelines and maps which give you chronological and geographical information. Rotate the skulls with the animation buttons and compare the shape and features of each. One of the intriguing questions in human evolution regards the place of Neanderthals. Were they our ancestors? How alike and how different were they from modern humans? After reviewing Section II, Cranial Morphology, proceed to Section III, Postcranial Morphology, and select "Body Mass." You will estimate the body mass of the Neanderthal and plot it (p. 5 of 7). The Neanderthal femoral head is _________ mm. Given your plot, do you think it is reasonable to assume that Neanderthals are part of the same evolutionary trend associated with modern humans? Explain: __________________________________________________________________________________________ Complete the exercise on "Sexual dimorphism." Use the data given to create a bar graph:

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Based on this evidence, what could you infer about the social behavior of the three hominids (A. boisei, H. erectus, Archaic H. sapiens)? Explain. Before lab this week review the sections indicated on the next two pages in your Investigating Olduvai CD. You will need to be familiar with these sections for lab exercises.

Gorilla Pongo Pan Hylobates A. boisei H. erectus Archaic Hs.

PRE-LAB/LAB 14: OLDUVAI LAB - PART I • Students should review these 2 pages on the CD before lab • Note: quizes are found under TOOLS, in the fieldbook and will be completed in lab • Sections useful for answering questions are listed on this handout • All students should have watched the movie under TOOLS, Overview before beginning • All pages are in the Data Base, unless otherwise noted Quiz 2, Geology 1. Ancient Geology-Stratigraphic Levels (4 of 19) location of FLK & Bed I (5 of 19) movie of Olduvai stratigraphy (6 of 19) stratigraphic section identifying location of FLK (7 of 19) photo of geological fault with beds identified Quiz 2, Geology 2. Ancient Geology-Introductory page (4 of 19) location of Bed I (8 of 19) stratigraphic column with dates * Ancient Environments: (everyone should view this page) (4 of 27) click "Investigate" for movie and explanation of geology; click "Bed I" for explanation Quiz 2, Geology 4. Ancient Geology-Geologic Fault (6 of 19) stratigraphy of FLK with faults (8 of19) explanation of stratigraphy & dates Ancient Environments-Olduvai Landscape Introduction (2 of 27) Olduvai lake basin (4 of 27) map/movie with explanation of geology (click Bed I, II, and III) Quiz 2, Geology 5. Ancient Environments: (4 of 27) map/movie (click "Investigate", click "Ndutu Bed", click "Recent") Ancient Geology: (1 of 19) photo of the Olduvai Gorge region (5 of 19) movie, showing stratigraphy FLK Excavation: (1 of 13) photo, showing topography (3 of 13) FLK artifacts Quiz 2, Geology 7. Ancient Geology-K/AR Dating: (11 to 13 of 19) read background FLK artifacts: (1 of 9) artifacts, fossil bone at the FLK site (2 of 9) FLK excavation and location of artifacts Quiz 2, Geology 9. Ancient Geology: (14 to 17 of 19) geomagnetism & time scale (8 of 19) stratigraphy with dates Continued…

PRE-LAB 14 Quiz 2, Geology 10. Ancient Geology-Biostratigraphy: (18 of 19) explanation of biostratigraphy (19 of 19) phylogenies of pigs Animal Guide: (29 to 31 of 31) identification of pig species Quiz 5, Combine Paleoenvironment questions 1 & 5. Ancient Environments: (1-27 of 27) read entire unit (1 of 5) geological evidence (12 to 16 of 27) pollen/vegetation evidence; graph of plant species, p. 13; graph of carbon isotope ratios, p. 16 (19 to 27 of 27) faunal evidence Savanna Vegetation: (1 to 2 of 9) savannas (3 to 5 of 9) grasslands and woodlands (6 of 9) map with rainfall and temperature; click location of Olduvai, Tanzania Quiz 5, Paleoenvironments 7. You need to collect these data: 1) The Genus name of all species found at the FLK site (use only the Animal Guide to collect names; also note that not all those illustrated in the animal guide were found at FLK), 2) common name of contemporary example, 3) habitat they lived in. Collect names of 15-20 species. Turn in the table from the lab manual and your graph. Animal Guide: (1 to 31 of 31) gives names and habitats of animals FLK Bone Data by Taxon: (2 to 15 of 15) names of animals, bone parts, cut marks Ancient Environments: (18 to 27 of 27) animal habitats FLK Bone Assemblage: (1 to 9 of 23) Quiz 5, Paleoenvironments 8. Ancient Environments: (27 of 27) taphonomy and bias in the data Analysis Menu: Site Formation Studies: (pp. 1 of 8) on p. 2 is an animation of site formation Analysis Menu: Skeletal Analysis: (1 to 9 of 19) p. 1-interactive wildebeest skeleton (12 of 19) interpretation of bone remains (12 of 19) sequence of carcass consumption FLK Bone Assemblage: (10 to 13 of 23) skeletal part representation, weathering, carnivore activity Quiz 5, Paleoenvironments 11. This question will be a synthesis of all the work done on this lab. Information from each expert's area should be shared and students will decide how to integrate it into a well-written report.

LAB 14—INVESTIGATING OLDUVAI - PART 1 (TO BE DONE IN LAB) LABS MEET IN ROOM 11 IH COMPUTER LAB WEEKS 14-16. Please bring your IO CD, a personal disk to save your data, and headphones to lab. Review the materials on the CD using the guide on the previous two pages before lab. This week we will begin the first of three in-lab exercises on the IO CD. We will work on interpretation of the geology and environment of the FLK-Zinjanthropus site. The issues to be explored this week will provide background for future in-lab sessions on IO. Therefore, you will address several questions: What was the process of site formation at the FLK site at Olduvai Gorge? How do we know how old it is? What are the different ways of determining the age of the site? In what kind of environment did Zinjanthropus live? What kinds of foods were available for Zinj to exploit? You will research these questions, using questions in Quiz 2 (Geology) & 5 (Paleoenvironments) in the Fieldbook, and write up a professional research report of 4-5 pages, worthy of publication in a physical anthropology journal; the report will be the basis for your grade. Consider Johanson’s work on the A. afarensis site. You will simulate his model of interdisciplinary research, synthesizing the work of paleoanthropologists, geologists, faunal experts, etc. You will work in interdisciplinary teams of three or four students. Each group will designate specialists to investigate particular aspects concerning the nature of the FLK site. Each expert will contribute data from their own specialty to the group, but each student must analyze and write up their own report. In your report, you will credit yourself and other students, by name, who contributed each type of information (as would be done in a professional journal). —BUT THE FINAL REPORT MUST BE YOUR OWN INDIVIDUAL WORK!!! After entering your own and other specialist’ contributions, summarize your final results. The objective is for you to simulate actual research on an early hominid site. Specialists should include (these will vary with lab and/or group size, and individuals may have to take on more than one role): GEOLOGY: PALEOENVIRONMENTS: stratigrapher (questions 1, 2, 4, 5) climatologist (question 1) K/Ar dating specialist (question 7) palynologist (question 5) paleomagnetic dating specialist (question 9) soil scientist (question 5) biostratigrapher (question 10) paleontologist/fossil fauna expert (question 7,8) Here is the procedure: 1. Each specialist will collect data to share with the group (approximately 45 minutes). 2. Specialists meet to consult—each person will share what they learned and other specialists will

discuss plausibile interpretations. Decide how you can best integrate your data to interpret the geology and paleoenvironment (ie., you will have different dating techniques--how can these best be combined to determine age of the site?) A good deal of communication among members should go on during the lab (approximately 45 minutes). You may find it necessary to work outside of lab time.

3. Write up your individual reports outside of class, to be turned in by Monday. Approach this exercise as investigators with a problem to solve. Rather than “look for the answers” in the Olduvai CD, read to enhance your knowledge and understanding of the FLK site and your ability to interpret as a paleoanthropologist. Rather than simple answers, demonstrate effort at explaining your answers to questions. Note that from the quiz itself (in the fieldbook) you can search for "related topics" that will lead you to data you will need to complete the exercise. Your T.A. will also give you suggestions as to where pertinent information can be located.

Format for Your Report: Please list names of all team members and their specializations. Cite each person for data contributed. 1) Subtitle: Introduction – Begin with an introduction, explaining what it is you are trying to accomplish. 2) Subtitle: Geology – Incorporate data for the following questions:

Geology 1* In which geological bed at Olduvai was the FLK-Zinj site buried? Geology 2* Was the FLK-Zinj site buried early or late in the stratigraphic sequence exposed at the gorge? (give dates) Geology 4* When did the first episode of geological faulting occur at Olduvai? Geology 5** Why is the Gorge eroding today?

3) Subtitle: Dating – Incorporate data for the following questions (be sure to explain methods): Geology 7** How can the K/Ar or 40Ar-39Ar techniques be used to establish an age for the

FLK-Zinj site without dating material from the site itself? What is the best estimate of the age of the site based on these methods?

Geology 9** How do paleomagnetic data help establish an age for the FLK-Zinj site? Geology 10** Describe how biostratigraphy can help establish the age of FLK-Zinj, using

specific examples of taxa found at the site.

4) Subtitle: The Paleoenvironment – Incorporate data for the following questions: Paleoenvironments – Combine 1** & 5*** 1. What does geological evidence reveal about the

landscape and climate of Bed I, Olduvai, and the location of the FLK-Zinj site on the ancient landscape?

5. What can be inferred about the vegetation pollens in the Olduvai basin when the FLK-Zinj site formed, based on a combination of evidence from fossil pollen, soil chemistry, and paleogeography?

Paleoenvironments 7*** What patterns do you see in the data that provide clues to the ancient environmental conditions at the site. Collect these data from the Animal Guide (FLK Bone Data by Taxon). Include only animals actually present at the FLK-Zinj site. (Note that in most cases prehistoric mammal species are now extinct and you must make analogies to related or comparable living species to answer this question). Give the genus name and modern equivalent—see P. 31 of the Animal Guide. You can click each animal and the common name will be given. Use the Paleo-Environment Worksheet to tabulate information about the likely preferred habitats of different species of mammal from the faunal assemblage (see Ancient Environments, beginning on P. 18, to learn about the habitat of each). Everyone must turn in a copy of the worksheet (next page) and apply its data in your analysis.

Paleoenvironments 8** In what ways could the macrofaunal assemblage from the site potentially be a biased sample of ancient habitats around FLK-Zinj? (you should address issues of taphonomy).

5) Subtitle: Conclusions

Paleoenvironments 11**** Rick Potts has hired your research team to reconstruct the ancient habitats of the hominids found at FLK-Zinj. This section, less than one page, should be your own summary of all the data collected.

Your final report should be approximately 4-5 pages in length.

Note: The number of stars (*, **, ***, ****) on questions will determine grading weight. Your grade will be based on effort, thoroughness, and comparison with the work of other students.

PALEO-ENVIRONMENT WORK SHEET

AQU

ATIC

WAT

ER M

ARG

IN

WID

E R

ANG

ING

/ D

RIN

KS D

AILY

OPE

N-C

OU

NTR

Y G

RAZ

ER

DR

Y BU

SH

WO

OD

LAN

D O

R

SAVA

NN

A

FOR

EST

ENVIRONMENTS FREQUENTED

FOSSIL NAME EXAMPLE OF COMMON (GENUS) MODERN ANIMAL or common name

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB – WEEK 15 PRE-LAB 15 Briefly review the fossil gallery for VL #12, including phylogeny, map, time line, and animations. In VL #10, Section IV, do the laboratory exercises for humerofemoral index, brain size, and tooth size. Humerofemoral index: first, state a hypothesis about whether the bipedal locomotion of A. afarensis, H. habilis, and H. erectus was similar to that of modern humans (one, two, all, or none of them may be similar); don't change your hypothesis--you are not penalized for proving your hypothesis is untrue! __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Plot the humerofemoral index for the hominids. For A. afarensis use "A", for H. habilis use "H", for H. erectus, use "E".

Below, explain the patterns in these data and what factors may have accounted for them. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

Continued…

Hum

erof

emor

al In

dex

Body Mass

PRE-LAB 15 Brain size: before beginning, state a hypothesis as to whether the large brain size of Neanderthals (1600 cc.), vs. modern humans (1355 cc.) made them more intelligent, or whether brain size was simply a factor of larger body mass (see p. 2 of 8): __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ View the graph for absolute brain size (p. 3 of 8). View the regression plot for hominoids and humans (p. 4 of 8). Was your hypothesis upheld? Why/why not? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Plot H. habilis (“Early Homo”) on p. 5 of 8 (use "X") and H. rudolfensis (“Early Homo”) on p. 6 of 8 (use "R") on the graph.

What can you conclude about the positions of these two species on the regression graph? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________

Continued….

M - modern humans N – Archaic (Neanderthal) E - H. erectus A – Australopithecus H - hominoids

PRE-LAB 15 Tooth size: Review pp. 1 & 2 of 6, then plot the cheek tooth size of H. habilis (p. 3) and H. erectus (p. 4). Use a small square for H. habilis and a small triangle for H. erectus and place them on the graph:

What might explain the relative positions of A. boisei, H. habilis, H. erectus, and modern H. sapiens on the graph? (which are most alike, what might tooth size suggest about diet) __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ New sections of the Olduvai CD to review before lab this week include: ANALYSIS: “Counting Bones" (1 to 6 of 8—on NISP and MNI); See also Virtual Laboratories #11 (III "Scavenging Carcasses," p. 4 of 5) “Methods: Skeletal Analysis” (10 to 19 of 19) DATA BASE: “FLK Bone Assemblage” (9, 13 to 23 of 23) Review: ANALYSIS: “Theory—Interpretive Debates” (11 to 14, 16, 18, 20, 23 of 26) ANALYIS: “Skeletal Analyis” (1 to 6 of 19) DATA BASE: “FLK Bone Data by Taxon” (2 to 15 of 15) There will be a quiz on sex determination and identification of fossil skulls, worth 20 points, during lab this week. The species galleries for VL #8, #10, and #12 have rotatable skulls for you to review. There are also on-line resources, as suggested in your lab manual for week 12.

boisei

robustus

gorilla

orang

bonobo

chimp

afarensis

africanus

Homo

LAB 15 – INVESTIGATING OLDUVAI - PART 2 (TO BE DONE IN LAB) LABS MEET IN ROOM 11 IH COMPUTER LAB. Bring your IO CD and a personal disk to save your data. You will continue working as an interdisciplinary team and investigate the Zinjanthropus site and what the evidence may reveal about the lifeways of australopithecines. Our objective is to understand the behavior and survival strategies of these early hominids. There will be a quiz on sex determination and identification of fossil skulls, worth 20 points, during this lab. Labs for weeks 15 and 16 will be combined into one final project report (see last page of your lab manual for the format). Again, you should aim to present a professional report worthy of publication, approximately 5 pages in length. Specialists in each group will collect data for interpretation, analyze the data, and share what you learned with others in the group. Each student will then write up their own individual report. Your focus this week will be on the zooarchaeology of the Zinj site. There are several issues to explore: Consider the "Man the mighty hunter” theme. Were these robust australopithecines hunting down their prey? Or, were they merely scavenging the remains of carnivore kills? Did they eat meat? And what evidence is there for this? What can the bones at the site tell us about their survival strategies? Then there are the confounding issues of taphonomy--what other factors (the schlep effect, water deposition, carnivore activity, etc.) created the debris at the site? Each member of your interdisciplinary team is responsible for collecting one or more kinds of information. You will share information and cooperate, citing the names of other students who contributed data, but all students must complete their own lab report—THESE MUST BE YOUR OWN INDIVIDUAL WORK!!! Possible specialists include (these will vary with lab size and you may divide up the labor in any way you choose or combine categories--these are only suggestions): • a theorist (or two) to analyze competing interpretations • a taphonomist to analyze site formation processes • a faunal specialist (or 2) to examine faunal remains at the site Note: some specializations will require more work than others, so divide up your work evenly!! Collect your data (approximately 45 minutes). Gather together to consult--each person will share what they learned and other specialists will discuss the plausibility of the interpretation. Decide how you can best integrate your data (approximately 45 minutes). Return to research, refine, and write up data. You may need to meet with colleagues outside of lab to complete your research project. In Quiz #7 Zooarcheology in the IO Fieldbook, answer the following revision of question #22: 22. Some researchers argued that early hominids were hunters ("Man the mighty hunter" hypothesis); others argued that they were marginal scavengers, scavenging the remains of carnivore kills. Prepare a scientific report in which you assess the question "Were early hominids hunters or marginal scavengers?" Include in your report sections on: 1) theory, 2) data you have collected for analysis, and 3) your own interpretation of the data. Attach worksheets (be sure to analyze the worksheet data in your report).

(see suggestions, next page)

LAB 15 To answer this question, you will need to address the issues of TOOL USE, BONE ANALYSIS, AND TAPHONOMY. The following sections will be of help . Theorist: "ANALYSIS" "Theory: Interpretive Debates" "Mighty Hunters?" (11 to 12 of 26) "Marginal Scavengers" (13 to 14 of 26) "Home Base" (16, 18, 20, and 23 of 26) Taphonomist: "ANALYSIS" "Counting Bones" (1 to 6 of 8 on NISP and MNI); (see also Virtual Laboratories #11 (III "Scavenging Carcasses," p. 4 of 5) “Methods: Skeletal Analyis” (1 to 6 of 19) Use data in (1) “FLK Bone Assemblage” (9 of 23), and (2) “FLK Bone Data by Taxon” (2 of 15)

for the bovid data, plus (3) “FLK Bone Data by Taxon” (2-15 of 15) for cutmark data to complete the MACROFAUNA ABUNDANCE WORKSHEET. For cutmarks, add the numbers for bovids from various pages (enter 0 for any animals for which no cutmark data are available). .

Observe the graphs (% NISP, % MNI, and % Cutmarks), noting the difference between NISP and MNI. Each student must fill in the table in the lab manual.

Faunal Specialist: “DATA BASE” "FLK Bone Assemblage" (skim 1 to 8, read 22 to 23 of 23) Use the data in “FLK Bone Data by Taxon” (2 of 15) to complete the BOVID ABUNDANCE WORKSHEET. Each student will fill in the data in the table in the you’re the lab manual. and print one copy of the cutmark totals to turn in. Use the data in "FLK Bone Assemblage" (13 of 23) to complete the BONE DAMAGE:

CUTMARK TOTALS WORKSHEET -Combine the data for size 1 & 2 animals and for size 3 & 4 animals -Note: total bones = total NISP Head & axial = head, ribs, vertebrae, pelvis Scapula & forearm = scapula & forelimb (humerus) Hindlimb = femur, lower limb Upper limb = meaty upper limb (radius or ulna) “Total meaty limb” and “total meaty shaft” rows are not used in the count -Each student will fill in the table in the lab manual and print 2 graphs, one for small and

one for large animals, to turn in “ANALYSIS” "Methods: Skeletal Analysis" (10 to 19 of 19) “DATA BASE: “FLK Bone Assemblage” (13 to 23 of 23) -Make note of the damage by both stone tools & carnivore toothmarks in “FLK Bone Assemblage” (17 of 23) Use data in “FLK Bone Assemblage” (19 of 23) to complete the BONE DAMANGE:

MACROFAUNA WORKSHEET. Each student will fill in the table in the lab manual and print two graphs, one of percussion

marks and one for tooth marks, to turn in.

MACROFAUNA ABUNDANCE WORKSHEET

BOVID ABUNDANCE WORKSHEET

NISP MNI CUT MARKS ELEPHANTS

GIRAFFIDS

HIPPOS

BOVIDS

EQUIDS

SUIDS

CARNIVORES

PRIMATES

% NISP % MNI % CUT MARKS

NISP MNI CUT MARKS TRAGELAPHINES

REDUNCINES

ANTILOPINES

ALCELAPHINES

HIPPOTRAGINES

BOVINES

% NISP % MNI % CUT MARKS

BONE DAMAGE – CUTMARK TOTALS WORKSHEET

BONE DAMAGE – MACROFAUNA WORKSHEET

Body size 1-2 Body size 3-5 Total bones identified

Cutmark total

Head & axial skeletal w/pelvis

Scapula & forelimb

Hindlimb

All lower forelimb elements

% Small % Large

Long bone shaft fragments

Epiphyses Near-epiphyses Mid-shaft (fragments)

With percussion

With toothmarks

Total fragments

% Cutmarks

PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY LAB – WEEK 16

No pre-lab this week; use your time to work on your lab reports.

INVESTIGATING OLDUVAI - PART 3 (TO BE DONE IN LAB) LABS MEET IN ROOM 11 IH COMPUTER LAB; please bring your IO CD and a floppy disk. Our final inter-disciplinary team work on IO focuses on stone tool technology and social behavior of early hominids. Zinj was not the only hominid found at the FLK site, so who made the tools? If hominids were making tools at this early date, what were they used for? You should become familiar with the tools at the site and the raw materials they were made from. In addition to investigation of tool use, you will try to answer the question, was the FKL site used as a "home base"? Are there biases in this interpretation? Are there other more plausible interpretations for the material remains at the FLK site? The questions you will research this week build on your interpretation of the site from the previous week. Possible specialists include: • a taphonomist to interpret site formation • an archaeologist & tool expert to interpret rock types and artifacts • a theorist to advise on the alternative hypotheses on site use • an ethnologist to make inferences based on the behavior of contemporary hunters and gatherers You will combine questions #1 and #7 in Quiz #6 - TOOLS AND TOOL MAKERS: 1/7. List and briefly describe the artifact assemblage at the FLK-Zinj site. What do you think the artifacts excavated at the site were used for? Include evidence that supports your conclusions. Answer this revision of questions #8 and #9 from Quiz #8 - BEHAVIORAL SCENARIOS: 8/9. What do you think was the most probable use of the FLK site (butchering site? home base? tool manufacturing site? multiple use site? other?). What evidence supports your position? Suggested pages for data collection: "ANALYSIS" Archaeologist: "ANALYSIS: Methods: Artifact Analysis" (2, 7 to 13 of 16) Archaeologist/Taphonomist: “ANALYSIS: Methods: Bone Damage” (1 to 18 of 18) Theorist: Review: "ANALYSIS: Interpretive Debates" (11 to 14 , 16, 18, 20, 23 of 26) Ethnologist/Taphonomist: Review: "ANALYSIS: Site Formation Studies" (1 to 3; 11 of 27) "DATA BASE" Archaeologist “FLK Artifacts” (1 to 9 of 9) Archaeologist: "FLK Site Plot" (1 of 1) Submit your complete report by Monday of finals week. You may place it in the box on Donna Chollett’s office door. NO LATE PAPERS ACCEPTED!

Format for Your Report: Week 15: 1) Subtitle: Introduction – Briefly state your purpose or objectives in writing this report. 2) Subtitle: Theories on Early Hominid Behavior – This section should include a detailed discussion of all theories. 3) Subtitle: The Bone Assemblage – This section must discuss the relative importance of NISP and MNI and the preservation of bones at the site. It should present the fossil evidence present, incorporating data from the Macrofauna Abundance and Bovid Abundance Worksheets, and draw conclusions about the fauna present. Attach the lab manual page with these two tables. 4) Subtitle: Inferences on Hominid Behavior – This section should analyze the completed Bone Damage-Cutmark Totals and the Bone Damage-Macrofauna Worksheets, which you will attach from your lab manual, as well as the 2 graphs (one for large, one for small animals). It should present a detailed description of the presence of cutmarks, percussion marks, and tooth marks. This is a critical section in which you will interpret the data and draw conclusions about what these hominids were up to, based on sizes of animals, parts of animals, and distinctions between tooth and cut marks. Take a position—were these hominids hunters or scavengers? Week 16: 5) Subtitle: The Artifacts: Description – You should include a table listing all the artifacts types at the site, giving brief descriptions of each. 6) Subtitle: The Artifacts: Distribution and Taphonomy – This section must discuss the possible ways the artifacts and bones were deposited and their probable association with each other. Discuss how data on modern hunter gatherer behavior might apply to your data and draw logical inferences about possible use of these tools. 7) Subtitle: The Use of the FLK-Zinj Site – In this section you should assess the different theories on site use (butchering, tool manufacture, home base, multiple use) and draw conclusions, based on the distribution of bones and artifacts. You must apply the theories to the data. 8) Subtitle: Conclusions -- Here briefly summarize all your evidence and draw a general conclusion about the nature of the FLK site and early hominid behavior. Again, take a position (hunters? scavengers?), based on your evidence. GRADING: A good paper will always include: theory, data, and analysis. Your 5 page report will be graded on: 1) completeness and thoroughness, 2) effort at investigating the data, 3) effort at analyzing and interpreting the data, and 4) overall quality of the work.