Retrieved from https://studentshare.org/anthropology/1645282-biological-anthropology-bipedalism
https://studentshare.org/anthropology/1645282-biological-anthropology-bipedalism.
Bipedalism Bipedalism is very important for human evolution and development because the upright stance adopted by early hominids allowed gave them a number of advantages. Firstly the creature could have both hands free to carry things; to use tools; to dig; cut; climb and to fight. The mothers could more easily carry infants, and this then allowed longer journeys to be made. Secondly the individual carries its head higher than if it were proceeding on all fours. This allows a much wider area of vision, allowing the creature both to see predators, but also to better see prey or other food, as well as any enemies ( Jacobs).
In warm climates less surface area is exposed directly to hot sun rays, and at the same time there is a larger area available to benefit from cooling. Disadvantages are that the eyes are now further from the ground, so further away from tracks being followed, or from low growing food. Also, by standing tall, the person is more likely to be seen at a distance by enemies and predators. As hominids moved out of Africa into cooler climates they were at a disadvantage as more of the body surface was exposed to colder weather.
The Dikika infant was a three year old (Sloan) member of the Australopithecus afarensis group, and was found encased within Ethiopian sandstone. The baby is apelike in her upper body, but human like below the waist. She is very small, and is likely to have been carried a lot of the time. Her skull supports only the same space that a three year old chimp’s brain would, so, in evolutionary terms, bipedalism seems to have come before great brain development. Jenk describes how some argue that the ape like, tree climbing facilities exhibited in this specimen may simply be inherited, and were not necessarily used.
Others say that these creatures used both humanoid bipedalism and ape like methods of locomotion. This is the skeleton of a very young child. This means that the skeleton does not exhibit the changes that would have occurred in an adult, because certain muscles were being used in preference to others. What is needed is a complete adult skeleton before a definitive answer can be arrived at with regard to the preferred method of locomotion. Works Cited Jacobs, James., Palaeoanthropology in the 1980’s: Essays, 2000, 7th May 2014 Jenk, Dan, , Oldest infant skeleton helps solidify human timeline, Arizona State University 2006, 7th May 2014, Sloan, Christopher.
, The Dikika infant, National Geographic, November 2006, 7th May 2014
Read More