Niche Construction through Cooperation: A Nonlinear Dynamics Contribution to Modeling Facets of the Evolutionary History in the GenusHomo

Abstract

CA+ Online-Only Material: Supplement AThe transition firom early members of the genus Homo to Homo erectus/ergaster is marked by subtle morphological shift:s but resulted in substantial changes in evolutionary trajectory. Prédation pressures on the honiinins may have been significant in influencing this transition. These contexts might have stimulated a shift in behavior and modes of engagement with the environment that initiated a complex suite of changes facilitating the emergence of current features of humanity. In this report we outline a potential model for these shifts based on nonlinear dynamical interactions involving niche construction and increased reliance on complex cooperation as an antipredator strategy. Modeling proposed selective pré-dation pressures on early humans, leading to the idea that increasingly complex sociality, patterns of cooperation, and niche construction laid the foundation for the successful emergence and spread of the genus Homo and potentially a concomitant decline for the genus Paranthropus.The transition by an early hominin group to the genus Homo is marked by subtle morpihological shifts but resulted in substantial changes in evolutionary trajectory and range of adaptation (Conroy 2004; McHenry and Coffing 2000;Wells and Stock 2007; Wood and CoUard 1999). Prédation and other ecological pressures on Australopithecines and early members of the genus Homo may have been significant in this transition (see Hart and Sussman 2005; Lockwood et al. 2007;Trêves and Palmquist 2007;Wood and Strait 2004}. These contexts might have stimulated a shift in behavior and modes of engagement with the environment that initiated a complex suite of changes facilitating the emergence of some key current features of humanity. It is our contention that prédation preset

Harsh childhood environmental characteristics predict exploitation and retaliation in humans

“…Cooperation has played unique roles in hominid reproduction, survival and parental care for several million years [1]; so the psychological mechanisms that regulate distinctly human forms of cooperation have plausibly been subject to natural selection [1,2]. For ancestral humans, everyday social relations were characterized by repeated cooperative interactions over long time horizons, which created selection pressure for reciprocity-that is, for cooperating with co-operators and punishing (or terminating interactions with) individuals who seek to exploit co-operators [2][3][4].…”

Human Being and Becoming

“…For example, macaque monkeys (genus Macaca) and humans share a particularly intensive relationship and interact in a dynamic, and deep, ecosystem across much of South and Southeast Asia Fuentes 2010;Fuentes et al 2005). This examination of the human-macaque interface reveals a range of behavioral, physiological, ecological, and cultural contexts that influence and shape the relationships.…”

“…The cultural modification of the landscape by humans impacts pathogen transmission patterns for both species and the population genetics of the macaques. After millennia of overlap between human populations and macaques, it becomes evident that the relationships between anthropogenic landscapes, including their economic and political histories, are central factors in the macaque distribution, behavior and ecology, and that the co-ecological processes influence human health, livelihood, and even religious practice (Fuentes 2010(Fuentes , 2012aJones-Engel et al 2008). …”

“…However, this pattern of relation-ship was, and is, not always the case. We know a relationship with predators played a significant role in shaping the evolutionary pressures favoring specific behavioral and ecological adaptations against predation, including extremely high levels of cooperation (Fuentes et al 2010;Hart and Sussman 2005). We also have reason to believe that our ancestors began to track and follow predators and to interface with them behaviorally in a manner beyond a predator-prey relationship as part of their foraging strategy.…”

“…However, because of our particular adaptive histories, including our special ability to modify and alter ecologies and our complex theory of mind and obligate linguisti- cally-mediated perceptual lifeways, we commonly perceive a structural and objective distinction between human beings and other beings: Too often in both anthropology and theology, we attempt to ignore a central part of our Umwelt. This distinction creates difficulties in understanding the organization and salience of naturecultures and mutual ecologies (Fuentes 2010;Haraway 2008) that characterize the multispecies relationships we exist in. It also constrains our abilities to think together and individually as disciplines about what it means to be human in the world.…”