Apith diet cf.Afr.apes, sedges...

[Marc Verha]

Contributions of Biogeochemistry to Understanding Hominin
Dietary Ecology Julia Lee-Thorp & Matt Sponheimer 2006
Yb.phys.Anthrop.49:131­148

Dietary ecology is one key to understanding the biology,
lifeways, and evolutionary pathways of many animals.
Determining the diets of long-extinct hominins, however, is a
considerable challenge. Although archaeological evidence forms
a pillar of our understanding of diet and subsistence in the
more recent past, for early hominins, the most direct evidence
is to be found in the fossils themselves. Here we review the
suite of emerging biochemical paleodietary tools based on
stable isotope and trace element archives within fossil
calcified tissues. We critically assess their contribution to
advancing our understanding of australopith, early Homo, and
Neanderthal diets within the broader context of
non-biogeochemical techniques for dietary reconstruction, such
as morphology and dental microwear analysis. The most
significant outcomes to date are the demonstration of high
trophic-level diets among Neanderthals and Late Pleistocene
modern humans in Glacial Europe, and the persistent inclusion
of C4 grass-related foods in the diets of Plio­Pleistocene
hominins in South Africa. Such studies clearly show the
promise of biogeochemical techniques for testing hypotheses
about the diets of early hominins. Nevertheless, we argue that
more contextual data from modern ecosystem and experimental
studies are needed if we are to fully realize their potential.
... The range of paleodietary methods applied to the South
African hominins provides a good case study for comparisons,
and allows elimination of at least some possibilities. Some
firm results have emerged. For one, the d13C data clearly show
that overall both australopith taxa and early Homo consumed
significant proportions of C4 or C4-derived foods. These
results can only be accounted for by consumption of C4 grass,
C4 sedges, or animals which ate these plants, but we cannot
tell what these possibilities are from these data alone. The
low d18O is consistent with consumptions of rhizomes or other
roots, as well as animal foods. The microwear data discounts
gelada-like graminivory, since the australopiths¹ pitted
molars (Grine 1986; Grine and Kay 1988) are unlike those of
modern geladas whose molar micro- wear is dominated by
scratches (Teaford 1993). On the other hand, two recent molar
microwear studies of savanna Papio baboon populations noted a
higher frequency of pitting than was found in Theropithecus
(Daegling and Grine
1999). These baboons consume moderate amounts of savanna
grasses on a seasonal basis. The trace element data from
australopith tooth enamel showed that Australopithecus,
and to a lesser extent Paranthropus, had higher Sr/Ca
ratios than contemporaneous carnivores, browsers, and
papionins. The unusual combination of high Sr/Ca and low
Ba/Ca in Australopithecus has only been found in modern
fauna that heavily utilize the underground portions of
grasses, such as warthogs (Phacochoerus africanus) and
African mole rats (Cryptomys hottentotus) (Sponheimer et
al.2005b). These elemental data are still preliminary,
and certainly cannot be used to state firmly that early
hominins consumed grass rhizomes. Nevertheless, they are
entirely consistent with the possibility and suggest
avenues for future research. Comparing the results from
the various techniques may also give us the opportunity
to question some of the assumptions on which we base
interpretations of the results. For instance, it has been
suggested that hominid dental anatomy was not well suited
for the processing of animal foods (Lucas and Peters
2000; Teaford et al.2002; Ungar, 2004), while the
chemical evidence points towards some consumption of
animal foods. It has perhaps not been appreciated that
these anatomical observations pertain only to a limited
class of animal foods (ie. flesh or meat-eating), while a
great many animal foods require little if any oral
processing. Termites, grasshoppers, ants, grubs, eggs,
and a variety of other insects may be eaten whole. Soft
tissues can also be consumed without oral processing if
they can be reduced to a suitable size through extra-oral
means. Moreover, in some cases apparent disjunctions
between dental morphology and actual trophic behavior can
result from the dentition being adapted for other, more
mechanically challenging foods in an animal¹s diet. For
example, capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) have large,
bunodont dentition with thick enamel adapted for
consuming fruits and hard nuts. Nonetheless, close to 25%
of capuchin diets can come from animal foods (Rosenberger
and Kinzey 1976; Fleagle 1999). Similarly, Grine et
al.(2006) showed that A.afarensis microwear closely
resembled that of gorillas while their dental and enamel
morphology suggested other affinities. These observations
are consistent with Ungar¹s (2004) argument that among
hominoids, differences in dental morphology primarily
reflect their multifarious fallback foods, rather than
their preferred foods during times of plenty. As for the
australopiths, stable isotopes suggest that they
broadened the ancestral ape resource base to include C4
foods which, coupled with bipedalism, allowed them to
pioneer increasingly open and seasonal environments. Yet,
there are equifinality problems that are common in stable
isotope and trace element studies. That is, many
different diets can lead to the same stable isotope (or
trace element) composition (Peters and Vogel
2000). Although some progress has been made using further
indicators, including d18O and trace elements, there is
little reason to believe that this problem can be
circumvented entirely by relying on chemical means. In
the end, stable isotopes are one tool among many, all of
which provide a slightly different window into the diets
of our ancestors. Stable isotopes will prove most
informative when pursued as part of a larger, integrated
paleodietary investigation. All of these tools also
require a great deal of active development to improve our
understanding of how they work in ecosystems today. For
instance, we still have much to learn about of the stable
isotope compositions of modern plants and mammals, and
how physiology affects diet-tissue spacing. We must also
continue to test comfortable assumptions. As a good
example, earlier notions of a simple stepwise trophic
system from trace elements that distinguishes,
herbivores, omnivores, and carnivores has been gradually
refined after a series of modern ecosystem studies in
different environments (Sillen 1988; Burton et al.1999;
Sponheimer and Lee-Thorp, Kruger National Park Project,
unpubl.data). Rather than a simple trophic level
indicator, Sr/Ca and Ba/Ca ratios may ultimately provide
just as much information about plant foods. Hopefully,
such actualistic and experimental work will serve to
further refine the entire suite of paleodietary tools.

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 20, 3:06=A0am, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:

> Julia Lee-Thorp

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm

What does stable carbon isotope analysis tell us about hominid
diets? Analysis of A. africanus tooth enamel from Makapansgat
Limeworks (about 3 million years old), and A. robustus and
early Homo from Swartkrans (about 1.5- 1.7 million years old)
produced some surprising results. If A. africanus was a fruit-
and leaf- eater as suggested by the microwear analysis, they
should show corresponding C3 carbon isotope signatures. But
they do not! Instead, the results show that, on average, 25%
of their dietary carbon came from grasses. For one individual
at Makapansgat it was more like 50%. It was also surprising
that the same pattern held for all the hominids at Makapansgat
and Swartkrans, over a period of some 1 to 2 million years
(see figure above).

None of the hominids analysed so far ate a diet like that of
the modern chimpanzee, gorilla, or even orangutan, all of
which eat nearly 100% C3 foods. This is not to say that they
did not eat fruits and leaves - they most probably did. But
they also ate quantities of actual grasses, or animals that
ate the grasses, or both. Grass itself is difficult to process
and to extract the nutrients (unless one is well-equipped to
do so, like a cow), so it's difficult to visualise how such a
large ''grass" signature could occur unless the hominids ate
some animal foods. C4 -consuming invertebrate and vertebrate
animals were abundant and easily collected by hominids.
Raymond Dart was on the right track all those years ago, even
if his environmental scenario was not quite right!

The important point is that we now know that all of these
hominids were willing to eat C4 resources that are generally
ignored by our primate cousins, the chimpanzees, gorillas, and
orangutans. Chimpanzees, for instance, stick to C3 'forest'
foods even when grasses or grass-eating animals are abundant.
It seems that hominids early on became dietary generalists who
broadened their diets and thus their resource base. This may
have been the seminal step in the development of the hominid
lineage. It makes sense when one considers that global
climates changed between about 4 - 1.8 millions years ago,
causing African forests to be replaced by woodlands and
grasslands.

Thanks for the early savanna confirmation!

[Marc Verha]

Op 20-04-2008 14:06, in artikel 6a5dcc79-7137-42ea-b225-c9edb-
8246bd1@w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen
<paleocity@hotmail.com> schreef:

> On Apr 20, 3:06 am, Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
>> Julia Lee-Thorp
>
> http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm
>
> What does stable carbon isotope analysis tell us about
> hominid diets? Analysis of A. africanus tooth enamel from
> Makapansgat Limeworks (about 3 million years old), and A.
> robustus and early Homo from Swartkrans (about 1.5- 1.7
> million years old) produced some surprising results. If A.
> africanus was a fruit- and leaf- eater as suggested by the
> microwear analysis, they should show corresponding C3 carbon
> isotope signatures. But they do not! Instead, the results
> show that, on average, 25% of their dietary carbon came from
> grasses. For one individual at Makapansgat it was more like
> 50%. It was also surprising that the same pattern held for
> all the hominids at Makapansgat and Swartkrans, over a
> period of some 1 to 2 million years (see figure above).
>
> None of the hominids analysed so far ate a diet like that of
> the modern chimpanzee, gorilla, or even orangutan, all of
> which eat nearly 100% C3 foods. This is not to say that they
> did not eat fruits and leaves - they most probably did. But
> they also ate quantities of actual grasses, or animals that
> ate the grasses, or both. Grass itself is difficult to
> process and to extract the nutrients (unless one is
> well-equipped to do so, like a cow), so it's difficult to
> visualise how such a large ''grass" signature could occur
> unless the hominids ate some animal foods. C4 -consuming
> invertebrate and vertebrate animals were abundant and easily
> collected by hominids. Raymond Dart was on the right track
> all those years ago, even if his environmental scenario was
> not quite right!
>
> The important point is that we now know that all of these
> hominids were willing to eat C4 resources that are generally
> ignored by our primate cousins, the chimpanzees, gorillas,
> and orangutans. Chimpanzees, for instance, stick to C3
> 'forest' foods even when grasses or grass-eating animals are
> abundant. It seems that hominids early on became dietary
> generalists who broadened their diets and thus their
> resource base. This may have been the seminal step in the
> development of the hominid lineage. It makes sense when one
> considers that global climates changed between about 4 - 1.8
> millions years ago, causing African forests to be replaced
> by woodlands and grasslands.

Thanks for confirming apiths ate sedges!

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 20, 5:11=A0am, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> Op 20-04-2008 14:06, in artikel 6a5dcc79-7137-42ea-b225-c9e-
> db8246...@w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com, Lee Olse=
n
> <paleoc...@hotmail.com> schreef:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 20, 3:06=A0am, Marc Verhaegen
> > <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
> >> Julia Lee-Thorp
>
> >http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm
>
> > What does stable carbon isotope analysis tell us about
> > hominid diets? Analysis of A. africanus tooth enamel from
> > Makapansgat Limeworks (about 3 million years old), and A.
> > robustus and early Homo from Swartkrans (about 1.5- 1.7
> > million years old) produced some surprising results. If A.
> > africanus was a fruit- and leaf- eater as suggested by the
> > microwear analysis, they should show corresponding C3
> > carbon isotope signatures. But they do not! Instead, the
> > results show that, on average, 25% of their dietary carbon
> > came from grasses. For one individual at Makapansgat it
> > was more like 50%. It was also surprising that the same
> > pattern held for all the hominids at Makapansgat and
> > Swartkrans, over a period of some 1 to 2 million years
> > (see figure above).
>
> > None of the hominids analysed so far ate a diet like that
> > of the modern chimpanzee, gorilla, or even orangutan, all
> > of which eat nearly 100% C3 foods. This is not to say that
> > they did not eat fruits and leaves - they most probably
> > did. But they also ate quantities of actual grasses, or
> > animals that ate the grasses, or both. Grass itself is
> > difficult to process and to extract the nutrients (unless
> > one is well-equipped to do so, like a cow), so it's
> > difficult to visualise how such a large ''grass" signature
> > could occur unless the hominids ate some animal foods. C4
> > -consuming invertebrate and vertebrate animals were
> > abundant and easily collected by hominids. Raymond Dart
> > was on the right track all those years ago, even if his
> > environmental scenario was not quite right!
>
> > The important point is that we now know that all of these
> > hominids were willing to eat C4 resources that are
> > generally ignored by our primate cousins, the chimpanzees,
> > gorillas, and orangutans. Chimpanzees, for instance, stick
> > to C3 'forest' foods even when grasses or grass-eating
> > animals are abundant. It seems that hominids early on
> > became dietary generalists who broadened their diets and
> > thus their resource base. This may have been the seminal
> > step in the development of the hominid lineage. It makes
> > sense when one considers that global climates changed
> > between about 4 - 1.8 millions years ago, causing African
> > forests to be replaced by woodlands and grasslands.
>
> =A0Thanks for confirming apiths ate sedges
on the savanna, you are welcome!

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 21, 4:03=A0am, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> :-D

Wetloons are stupid stupd stupid & commpletely devoid of any
sense of humor..

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 21, 10:18=A0am, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:

>
> When are we going to learn?:

It would be better if both of you went to the library,
that way you wouldn't be polluting this forum with your
idiot comments.

[Makouli]

"Marc Verhaegen" <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote in message
news:C430FFA0.117B7%m_verhaegen@skynet.be...
>
> Op 20-04-2008 14:06, in artikel 6a5dcc79-7137-42ea-b225-c9e-
> db8246bd1@w8g2000prd.googlegroups.com, Lee Olsen
> <paleocity@hotmail.com> schreef:
>
>> On Apr 20, 3:06 am, Marc Verhaegen
>> <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>>
>>> Julia Lee-Thorp
>>
>> http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm
>>
>> What does stable carbon isotope analysis tell us about
>> hominid diets? Analysis of A. africanus tooth enamel from
>> Makapansgat Limeworks (about 3 million years old), and A.
>> robustus and early Homo from Swartkrans (about 1.5- 1.7
>> million years old) produced some surprising results. If A.
>> africanus was a fruit- and leaf- eater as suggested by the
>> microwear analysis, they should show corresponding C3
>> carbon isotope signatures. But they do not! Instead, the
>> results show that, on average, 25% of their dietary carbon
>> came from grasses. For one individual at Makapansgat it was
>> more like 50%. It was also surprising that the same pattern
>> held for all the hominids at Makapansgat and Swartkrans,
>> over a period of some 1 to 2 million years (see figure
>> above).
>>
>> None of the hominids analysed so far ate a diet like that
>> of the modern chimpanzee, gorilla, or even orangutan, all
>> of which eat nearly 100% C3 foods. This is not to say that
>> they did not eat fruits and leaves - they most probably
>> did. But they also ate quantities of actual grasses, or
>> animals that ate the grasses, or both. Grass itself is
>> difficult to process and to extract the nutrients (unless
>> one is well-equipped to do so, like a cow), so it's
>> difficult to visualise how such a large ''grass" signature
>> could occur unless the hominids ate some animal foods. C4
>> -consuming invertebrate and vertebrate animals were
>> abundant and easily collected by hominids. Raymond Dart was
>> on the right track all those years ago, even if his
>> environmental scenario was not quite right!
>>
>> The important point is that we now know that all of these
>> hominids were willing to eat C4 resources that are
>> generally ignored by our primate cousins, the chimpanzees,
>> gorillas, and orangutans. Chimpanzees, for instance, stick
>> to C3 'forest' foods even when grasses or grass-eating
>> animals are abundant. It seems that hominids early on
>> became dietary generalists who broadened their diets and
>> thus their resource base. This may have been the seminal
>> step in the development of the hominid lineage. It makes
>> sense when one considers that global climates changed
>> between about 4 - 1.8 millions years ago, causing African
>> forests to be replaced by woodlands and grasslands.
>
> Thanks for confirming apiths ate sedges!

"...or animals that ate the grasses..."

================================
"You only read what you like to read." Marco --01/01/03

[Marc Verha]

>> Thanks for confirming apiths ate sedges!

SF:
> "...or animals that ate the grasses..."

:-D

Savanna believers are stupid stupid stupid. My little boy, as
Lee-Thorpe & everybody agrees, isotopic data can't exclude
that apiths ate animals that ate sedges, but that no reason to
neglect all other evidence. Although here & there some
imbecile still thinks apiths ran after kudus, everybody agrees
that huge cheekbones, broad cheekteeth, small canines
etc.exclude carnivory & prove strong herbivory. Grow up.

[Marc Verha]

>>  Thanks for confirming apiths ate sedges

SF:
> on the savanna, you are welcome!

SFs are stupid stupid stupid. My little boy, are you really
too stupid to discern between "fossils" of Afr.hominids
(apiths in this case) & "human ancestors"??

http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Symposium.html

[Gerrit Han]

claudiusdenk@sbcglobal.net wrote:

>Who is Lee-Thorp and why should we care.

Caught with your pants down again, Jimmy. Anyone familiar with
PA knows that Professor Julia Lee-Thorp is a specialist in the
use of light stable isotopes in (paleo)ecological analyses.
Very important information in niche reconstruction.

When are you ever going to learn?!

Gerrit

[Marc Verha]

> claudiusdenk@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>> Who is Lee-Thorp and why should we care.

> Caught with your pants down again, Jimmy. Anyone familiar
> with PA knows that Professor Julia Lee-Thorp is a specialist
> in the use of light stable isotopes in (paleo)ecological
> analyses. Very important information in niche
> reconstruction. When are you ever going to learn?! Gerrit

When are we going to learn?: it's better not to answer loons
like Olson & Denk.

[Jerry Warn]

very interesting - to me at least. You should explain to
people the various lab techniques used, eg mass spectroscopy,
photospectrophotometry, etc. Good job Marc! Jerry

Marc Verhaegen wrote:

> Contributions of Biogeochemistry to Understanding Hominin
> Dietary Ecology Julia Lee-Thorp & Matt Sponheimer 2006
> Yb.phys.Anthrop.49:131­148
>
> Dietary ecology is one key to understanding the biology,
> lifeways, and evolutionary pathways of many animals.
> Determining the diets of long-extinct hominins, however, is
> a considerable challenge. Although archaeological evidence
> forms a pillar of our understanding of diet and subsistence
> in the more recent past, for early hominins, the most direct
> evidence is to be found in the fossils themselves. Here we
> review the suite of emerging biochemical paleodietary tools
> based on stable isotope and trace element archives within
> fossil calcified tissues. We critically assess their
> contribution to advancing our understanding of australopith,
> early Homo, and Neanderthal diets within the broader context
> of non-biogeochemical techniques for dietary reconstruction,
> such as morphology and dental microwear analysis. The most
> significant outcomes to date are the demonstration of high
> trophic-level diets among Neanderthals and Late Pleistocene
> modern humans in Glacial Europe, and the persistent
> inclusion of C4 grass-related foods in the diets of
> Plio­Pleistocene hominins in South Africa. Such studies
> clearly show the promise of biogeochemical techniques for
> testing hypotheses about the diets of early hominins.
> Nevertheless, we argue that more contextual data from modern
> ecosystem and experimental studies are needed if we are to
> fully realize their potential. ... The range of paleodietary
> methods applied to the South African hominins provides a
> good case study for comparisons, and allows elimination of
> at least some possibilities. Some firm results have emerged.
> For one, the d13C data clearly show that overall both
> australopith taxa and early Homo consumed significant
> proportions of C4 or C4-derived foods. These results can
> only be accounted for by consumption of C4 grass, C4 sedges,
> or animals which ate these plants, but we cannot tell what
> these possibilities are from these data alone. The low d18O
> is consistent with consumptions of rhizomes or other roots,
> as well as animal foods. The microwear data discounts
> gelada-like graminivory, since the australopiths¹ pitted
> molars (Grine 1986; Grine and Kay 1988) are unlike those of
> modern geladas whose molar micro- wear is dominated by
> scratches (Teaford 1993). On the other hand, two recent
> molar microwear studies of savanna Papio baboon populations
> noted a higher frequency of pitting than was found in
> Theropithecus (Daegling and Grine
> 1999). These baboons consume moderate amounts of savanna
> grasses on a seasonal basis. The trace element data
> from australopith tooth enamel showed that
> Australopithecus, and to a lesser extent Paranthropus,
> had higher Sr/Ca ratios than contemporaneous
> carnivores, browsers, and papionins. The unusual
> combination of high Sr/Ca and low Ba/Ca in
> Australopithecus has only been found in modern fauna
> that heavily utilize the underground portions of
> grasses, such as warthogs (Phacochoerus africanus) and
> African mole rats (Cryptomys hottentotus) (Sponheimer
> et al.2005b). These elemental data are still
> preliminary, and certainly cannot be used to state
> firmly that early hominins consumed grass rhizomes.
> Nevertheless, they are entirely consistent with the
> possibility and suggest avenues for future research.
> Comparing the results from the various techniques may
> also give us the opportunity to question some of the
> assumptions on which we base interpretations of the
> results. For instance, it has been suggested that
> hominid dental anatomy was not well suited for the
> processing of animal foods (Lucas and Peters 2000;
> Teaford et al.2002; Ungar, 2004), while the chemical
> evidence points towards some consumption of animal
> foods. It has perhaps not been appreciated that these
> anatomical observations pertain only to a limited class
> of animal foods (ie. flesh or meat-eating), while a
> great many animal foods require little if any oral
> processing. Termites, grasshoppers, ants, grubs, eggs,
> and a variety of other insects may be eaten whole. Soft
> tissues can also be consumed without oral processing if
> they can be reduced to a suitable size through
> extra-oral means. Moreover, in some cases apparent
> disjunctions between dental morphology and actual
> trophic behavior can result from the dentition being
> adapted for other, more mechanically challenging foods
> in an animal¹s diet. For example, capuchin monkeys
> (Cebus apella) have large, bunodont dentition with
> thick enamel adapted for consuming fruits and hard
> nuts. Nonetheless, close to 25% of capuchin diets can
> come from animal foods (Rosenberger and Kinzey 1976;
> Fleagle 1999). Similarly, Grine et al.(2006) showed
> that A.afarensis microwear closely resembled that of
> gorillas while their dental and enamel morphology
> suggested other affinities. These observations are
> consistent with Ungar¹s (2004) argument that among
> hominoids, differences in dental morphology primarily
> reflect their multifarious fallback foods, rather than
> their preferred foods during times of plenty. As for
> the australopiths, stable isotopes suggest that they
> broadened the ancestral ape resource base to include C4
> foods which, coupled with bipedalism, allowed them to
> pioneer increasingly open and seasonal environments.
> Yet, there are equifinality problems that are common in
> stable isotope and trace element studies. That is, many
> different diets can lead to the same stable isotope (or
> trace element) composition (Peters and Vogel
> 2005). Although some progress has been made using further
> indicators, including d18O and trace elements, there is
> little reason to believe that this problem can be
> circumvented entirely by relying on chemical means. In
> the end, stable isotopes are one tool among many, all
> of which provide a slightly different window into the
> diets of our ancestors. Stable isotopes will prove most
> informative when pursued as part of a larger,
> integrated paleodietary investigation. All of these
> tools also require a great deal of active development
> to improve our understanding of how they work in
> ecosystems today. For instance, we still have much to
> learn about of the stable isotope compositions of
> modern plants and mammals, and how physiology affects
> diet-tissue spacing. We must also continue to test
> comfortable assumptions. As a good example, earlier
> notions of a simple stepwise trophic system from trace
> elements that distinguishes, herbivores, omnivores, and
> carnivores has been gradually refined after a series of
> modern ecosystem studies in different environments
> (Sillen 1988; Burton et al.1999; Sponheimer and
> Lee-Thorp, Kruger National Park Project, unpubl.data).
> Rather than a simple trophic level indicator, Sr/Ca and
> Ba/Ca ratios may ultimately provide just as much
> information about plant foods. Hopefully, such
> actualistic and experimental work will serve to further
> refine the entire suite of paleodietary tools.

[Jerry Warn]

Lee Olsen wrote:

> On Apr 20, 3:06 am, Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
>
> > Julia Lee-Thorp
>
> http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2001/december/hominids.htm
>
> What does stable carbon isotope analysis tell us about
> hominid diets? Analysis of A. africanus tooth enamel from
> Makapansgat Limeworks (about 3 million years old), and A.
> robustus and early Homo from Swartkrans (about 1.5- 1.7
> million years old) produced some surprising results. If A.
> africanus was a fruit- and leaf- eater as suggested by the
> microwear analysis, they should show corresponding C3 carbon
> isotope signatures. But they do not! Instead, the results
> show that, on average, 25% of their dietary carbon came from
> grasses.

Not necessarily. Not saying you aren't correct but am saying
there are absorptive effects from other elements and reactive
processes which can erase or absorb a trace effect. You know
that. These chemistries are complex enough to warrant a
'broad' interpretation. However, how very "great" that such
techniques are finally being employed. Its been a long long
battle (against conservatism). Thanks and cheers Jerry

> For one individual at Makapansgat it was more like 50%. It
> was also surprising that the same pattern held for all the
> hominids at Makapansgat and Swartkrans, over a period of
> some 1 to 2 million years (see figure above).
>
> None of the hominids analysed so far ate a diet like that of
> the modern chimpanzee, gorilla, or even orangutan, all of
> which eat nearly 100% C3 foods. This is not to say that they
> did not eat fruits and leaves - they most probably did. But
> they also ate quantities of actual grasses, or animals that
> ate the grasses, or both. Grass itself is difficult to
> process and to extract the nutrients (unless one is
> well-equipped to do so, like a cow), so it's difficult to
> visualise how such a large ''grass" signature could occur
> unless the hominids ate some animal foods. C4 -consuming
> invertebrate and vertebrate animals were abundant and easily
> collected by hominids. Raymond Dart was on the right track
> all those years ago, even if his environmental scenario was
> not quite right!
>
> The important point is that we now know that all of these
> hominids were willing to eat C4 resources that are generally
> ignored by our primate cousins, the chimpanzees, gorillas,
> and orangutans. Chimpanzees, for instance, stick to C3
> 'forest' foods even when grasses or grass-eating animals are
> abundant. It seems that hominids early on became dietary
> generalists who broadened their diets and thus their
> resource base. This may have been the seminal step in the
> development of the hominid lineage. It makes sense when one
> considers that global climates changed between about 4 - 1.8
> millions years ago, causing African forests to be replaced
> by woodlands and grasslands.
>
> Thanks for the early savanna confirmation!

[Claudius D]

On Apr 21, 5:59=A0am, Gerrit Hanenburg
<G.Hanenb...@inter.nl.nomail.net> wrote:
> claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> >Who is Lee-Thorp and why should we care.
>
> Caught with your pants down again, Jimmy. Anyone familiar
> with PA knows that Professor Julia Lee-Thorp is a specialist
> in the use of light stable isotopes in (paleo)ecological
> analyses.

Who cares.

> Very important information in niche reconstruction.
>
> When are you ever going to learn?!

There's more to science than name dropping.

[Claudius D]

On Apr 20, 11:58=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> On Apr 20, 11:39=A0am, Lee Olsen
> <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 20, 10:46=A0am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
> > > On Apr 20, 10:20=A0am, Gerrit Hanenburg
> > > <G.Hanenb...@inter.nl.nomail.net> wrote:
> > > > Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> > > > >Contributions of Biogeochemistry to Understanding
> > > > >Hominin Dietary E=
cology
> > > > >Julia Lee-Thorp & Matt Sponheimer 2006
> > > > >Yb.phys.Anthrop.49:131=AD148=

>
> > > > <snip>
>
> > > > In a correspondence with Matt Sponheimer about the use
> > > > of oxygen isotopes in early hominid paleoecology, in
> > > > particular with regard to=
a
> > > > possible wetland ecology and their water dependence
> > > > relative to othe=
r
> > > > mammalian taxa, Matt told me that "From an oxygen
> > > > standpoint, they look like terrestrial grazers and
> > > > carnivores, and a bit lower than browsers. Thus, very
> > > > typical terrestrial signal."
>
> > > > Gerrit
>
> > > So does Sponheimer have a =A0hypothesis of his own?
> > > =A0Does he agree w=
ith
> > > Lee's endurant running/hunting hypothesis.
>
> > On Apr 20, 10:46 am, claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 20, 10:20 am, Gerrit Hanenburg
>
> > > <G.Hanenb...@inter.nl.nomail.net> wrote:
> > > > Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> > > > >Contributions of Biogeochemistry to Understanding
> > > > >Hominin Dietary E=
cology
> > > > >Julia Lee-Thorp & Matt Sponheimer 2006
> > > > >Yb.phys.Anthrop.49:131=AD148=

>
> > > > <snip>
>
> > > > In a correspondence with Matt Sponheimer about the use
> > > > of oxygen isotopes in early hominid paleoecology, in
> > > > particular with regard to=
a
> > > > possible wetland ecology and their water dependence
> > > > relative to othe=
r
> > > > mammalian taxa, Matt told me that "From an oxygen
> > > > standpoint, they look like terrestrial grazers and
> > > > carnivores, and a bit lower than browsers. Thus, very
> > > > typical terrestrial signal."
>
> > > > Gerrit
>
> > > So does Sponheimer have a =A0hypothesis of his own?
> > > =A0Does he agree with Lee's endurant running/hunting
> > > hypothesis.

No response.

>
> > =A0You are still as confused as Verhaegin, even though the
> > distiction has been made X-times, there is a difference
> > between A'piths and Homo (yes, duh).
>
> I never stated there was no distinction.

No response.

>
> > Lee-Thorp mentions BOTH species.
>
> Who is Lee-Thorp and why should we care.

No response.

>
> > Running, like us, only applies to Homo.
>
> Uh, okay. =A0What's your point?
>
> > Since chimps can run for short distances and can hunt to a
> > limited degree, then it would follow that A'piths would
> > also be somewhat limited in these abilities. =A0AFAIK, the
> > C3 chimp signature does not reflect the little known
> > hunting that we know chimps do, but I could be wrong on
> > this. =A0
>
> Try as you might, you will never be able to conceal the
> blatant absurdity of the supposition that HE employed
> endurant hunting through treeless habitat populated by
> saber-toothed cats and bear-sized hyena.

No dispute.

>
> > So long as idiots like you and Verhaegin can't read, I
> > guess you=A0will remain permanently confused.
>
> > > How does he describe the selective origins of hominids
> > > intellect?
>
> No response.

Still no response.

>
> > > Or is it a secret?
>
> No response.
>
> > Why don't you try a library for your questions?
>
> Provide a reference you evasive twit.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 24, 10:51=A0am, Claudius Denk
<claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>
> There's more to science than name dropping.

Says Claud the Illiterate.

Message-ID: <376ED09C.69A21...@thegrid.net>#1/1 Niccolo
Caldararo: " It is embarrassing to you (or should be) for you
to continually make statements which most of us know are
unsupported by the data."

Dan Barnes: "..a number of people have suggested that the best
thing you can do is do substantial background reading, reframe
your arguement and come back again."

Greg Laden: "Read the stuff. If you have a vague memory of it,
that is not good enough." "Hit the books, kid!"

[Lee Olsen]

On Apr 24, 10:54=A0am, Claudius Denk
<claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

No response.

A review of Claud's posting history on sap:

1a. Is this true? Do you really believe that spears couldn't
be used for fish? Why not?

1b. Nobody lived on the savanna until the advent of
jeeps and guns.
2. Lions evolved from saber-tooth cats.
3. Apiths never ventured more than 50/100 yds away
from a tree.
4. Climate change is not happening presently.
5. Agriculture probably stretches back hundreds of thousand
if not millions of years.
6. Genetic drift is a pseudo-scientific notion.
7. Spears are useless against hyena and lions.
8. ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow
and arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record
starting about
9.5 mya?
10. Then you should stop;pissing into it.
11. Speak for yourself. I see just fine at night.
12. Uh, er. These artifacts don't come with notes attached to
them that indicate how they were actually used.
13. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few
thousand years ago.
14. So Paul, now that you've, finally, come to accept the
fact that early hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in
treed habitat.

Nice to get some input from the mind of an loon once in a
while.

[Rich Travs]

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> :-D
> Savanna fantasts are stupid stupd stupid & commpletely
> devoid of any sense of humor..

A laughable attempt by Marc to explain his not reading
carefully.

> Op 21-04-2008 07:02, in artikel
> 480C1FD6.42D50F2@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
>
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >>
> >> Op 20-04-2008 19:20, in artikel
> >> fpum045a4u5i8epu4i05l27abjf4toqf7v@4ax.com, Gerrit
> >> Hanenburg <G.Hanenburg@inter.nl.nomail.net> schreef:
> >>
> >>>> Contributions of Biogeochemistry to Understanding
> >>>> Hominin Dietary Ecology Julia Lee-Thorp & Matt
> >>>> Sponheimer 2006 Yb.phys.Anthrop.49:131­148
> >>
> >>> In a correspondence with Matt Sponheimer about the use
> >>> of oxygen isotopes in early hominid paleoecology, in
> >>> particular with regard to a possible wetland ecology and
> >>> their water dependence relative to other mammalian taxa,
> >>> Matt told me that "From an oxygen standpoint, they look
> >>> like terrestrial grazers and carnivores, and a bit lower
> >>> than browsers. Thus, very typical terrestrial signal."
> >>
> >> "look like" if you don't know better, but
> >> Lee-Thorp+Sponheimer know better, eg,
> >
> > Marc, Gerrit is *quoting* Sponheimer!
> >
> > "In a correspondence with Matt Sponheimer..."
> >
> > Did you miss that????