Primate Acquisition

Primates are one of the most interesting mammals on earth, not only because of their complex social structures, but because they hold so many similar characteristics to humans. Primates are often cited as our closest living relatives and on two separate occasions I observed four separate species of primates at the San Diego Zoo that can justify their use of their physical characteristics and behaviors that may be similar as well as different to the other primates and ours.

Within this essay, we will study more in depth the behavioral as well as physical traits of two primates at a zoo from their interaction with their peers to their place in the group. This observation would enable us to further understand the possible existing correlation between humans and primates. First, I studied a female chimpanzee with her baby, and then, a dominant male gorilla, in San Francisco Zoo at about noon, on May 23, 2015, for an hour each. Even though they share some similarities such as having a large brain, living for a long time, and being bored in their enclosure, they are still different; when gorillas are the largest, chimpanzees are the smartest. In fact, chimps use tools to catch food, they would not be able to reach

For this assignment, I have decided to design an enclosure about the primate, Mandrill. I will, in words, describe an enclosure that will prevent these nonhuman primates from not being suited to their natural habitat needs. Throughout this assignment, I will design my very own version of a perfect enclosure that secures these primates by critically thinking of any psychological or physical problems that can occur. What also will need to partake is considering the perspective of the nonhuman primates, the zookeepers, and the visitors as well. Designing an enclosure has to be precise and detailed. I will do the best I can to be as detailed as I can be when designing this enclosure.

Non human primates’ social organization can provide useful information how human social evolution occurs. We will go over main points of how similar and different non human primates such as chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas’ society are compared to ours, humans.

     I think that if culture is defined as learned behavior, than it is reasonable to say that primates posses a form of culture. Primates have been observed making tools to aid in collecting food and developing communication system, both of which are learned behaviors.

The second grade of primates evolved about 53 million years ago, in Eocene epoch. There are five tarsier species that all live in the islands of Southeast Asia, where they inhabit from tropical forest to backyard gardens (Jurmain, et al, 2011). They are considered to be closely related to lemurs and lorises (prosimian family) for the several traits that they share with Grade I primates while having some anthropoid features as well. However, tarsiers have distinctive characteristics that isolate them from other primates. They are categorized as the smallest creatures among the primate species and they are well known for their enormous eyes which is as large as its brain. They are normally nocturnal insectivores but sometimes carnivorous. They catch insects by jumping at them and as they jump from tree to tree, they even hunt for birds while in motion.

The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum was a period of time around the Paleocene-Eocene boundary during which the Earth experienced a significant rise in temperature. As we discussed in class January 27-February 3, the PETM period conveniently coincides with primate evolution and dispersal worldwide. This period of thermal increase is important to primate evolution because this rise in temperature worldwide created an ideal, survivable environment for primates globally. This rise in temperature encouraged primates to expand their territories into areas not previously inhabitable, such as the Arctic Circle. Additionally, I believe that the PETM may have encouraged primates to evolve into broader adaptive radii in order to exploit more tropical food sources and landscapes. In general, it is acknowledged that the PETM allowed primates to become more pervasive worldwide.

Their CT scans showed that the tiny brain housed in the ancient skull actually had a plethora of wrinkles and folds, indicating a vastly complex brain. In addition to the many wrinkles and folds, however, another stunning discovery was made. The 3-D model showed that the olfactory bulb, which is the part of the brain used to perceive and interpret smells, was actually quite large. It had a size that was three times bigger than expected of a primate of that size, indicating that its sense of smell was highly elevated compared to primates of today. In comparison, primates of today have much larger brains, but much smaller olfactory bulbs. It is believed that this is due to a trade-off that occurred as sight improved over time. The researchers believe that this means that the ancient primate that the 15-million-year-old monkey skull belonged to qu ite possibly did not have to make such a trade-off and instead had held on to both

We measured the skulls of Homo erectus, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Neanderthals species by measuring the widths, heights, and length of their craniums and the diameter of the eye socket (orbit height). We used measuring tape and calipers to measure these skulls by adjusting the calipers to a fast, for taking a precise measurement of the skull’s width, height, and length. We did not include the fins of some of these skulls when measuring the width; because these will make the measurements and the Encephalization Quotient (EQ) inaccurate. After we had got the precise measurement of each one of them at a time, we used a tape measure to gauge the distance between the ends of the caliper and recorded all the measurements on the data sheet

Sanides argues that the highly differentiated primary sensorimotor areas are the most developed areas in the brain and thus represent the most recent stage in cortical evolution, whereas the association cortex is a “primitive” feature of the primate brain. However the dividing line between two developmental trends based on geodesic distance measurement includes both association and sensorimotor regions. In the transitional link between reptiles and mammals there must have developed from paleo and archicortex an expression of three sensory (somatosensory, auditory, visual) and one motor region with a higher specialized structure resulting in the refined sensory and motor representations and relationships with peripheral sense organs and muscles.

Consider the chimpanzees, of whom we share over 98.8% of our DNA with (Tomkins, 2). The obviously inevitable question follows that why and how have we suppressed our evolutionary counter species despite the genetic similarities? What are chimpanzees missing? Andrew Clark, a geneticist, suggest that “perhaps some of the genes that enable humans to understand speech work not only in the brain, but also are involved in hearing. Mutations in alpha tectorin result in poor frequency response of the ear, making it hard to understand speech” (Clark, 3). In addition, “humans and simians are born with the same laryngal machinery, but a human infants larynx drops at three months of age, creating a resonating chamber, which makes consonant and vowel sounds possible. Apes speak through the nose and cannot make the same phonetic sounds humans make by using their lips, cheeks, tongue, palate, and teeth”(Platt). However, sounds alone do not a language and Platt’s proposal may be evidence to why certain animals lack the ability to

These individuals travelled upright on long legs, with human-shaped hips and pelvis, but still climbed through trees on ape-like arms. They had the small teeth and more modern face of Homo genus that includes modern humans, but the relatively primitive feet and “tiny brain” of Australopithecus. Its primitive anatomy included a brain the size of an average orange. Other Australopithecines and early species of Homo, like H. naledi, were its contemporaries.

The evolution of the human body can be observed from studying the intermediates found in ancestral organisms. Shubin proposes that every attribute that makes us human can be traced back to a time that showcases its importance for survival. Every single trait in the human body has been selected for through multiple mechanisms of evolution, natural selection being one of them. This theory is intriguing because not long ago it was unheard of to relate humans to fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and birds. Every highly specialized characteristic such as balance, sight, smell, and more began as an extremely simple mutational advantage. The complexity seems unfathomable to many as to how the human body as been come to be, but everything can be explained logically once scientists take a closer look at other organisms. Selective pressure is constantly promoting the survival of advantages mutations and quickly removing disadvantageous traits. Organisms were not designed to be what they are today but rather they underwent a lengthy experiment of trial and error.

Associated with these changes is a gradual reduction in the size of the face and jaws. In early hominines, the face was large and positioned in front of the braincase. As the teeth became smaller and the brain expanded, the face became smaller and its position changed. Thus, the relatively small face of modern humans is located below, rather than in front of, the large, expanded braincase. Evidence of immediate relatives of the human species begins about five million years ago with the Australopithecus genus and leads in to the primitive Homo genus to modern humans. The nature of the human 's evolution before that is uncertain, but scientists have hypothesized some ideas. What they do know is that between 7 and 20 million years ago, primitive apelike animals were widely distributed on the African and later on the Eurasian continents. Although many fossil bones and teeth have been found, the way of life of these creatures, and their evolutionary relationships to the living apes and humans, remain matters of strong disagreement among scientists. One of these fossil apes, known as Sivapithecus, appears to share many features with the living Asian great ape and the orangutan, whose direct ancestor it may well be. None of these fossils, however, offers convincing evidence of being on the evolutionary line leading to the hominid family generally. But they do help paint a picture of what early human relatives could have been like. The convincing

The available population wide phenotypic and genotypic data from humans and the great apes has been used for increased investigation into the relationship between patterns of genotypic and phenotypic evolution. Mainly, the interest has been concentrated around comparing the effects of neutral and adaptive evolutionary processes in influencing genotypic and phenotypic evolution. An interspecies analysis of the variation in cranial morphology indicated that there was a larger effect of genetic grift than selection. One way to bypass this horizon is to study extant species. The genus Pan, is the best extant species to use because it is our closest relative and there is an immense amount of information available about the population structure, morphology, behavioral traits and phylogeographic information as well as the genetic diversity of the species. There are two species that are recognized P. troglodytes the common chimpanzee, which has four sub species and P. paniscus (bonobo).