Comparing walking and running in persistence hunting
Martin Hora cs 2022 JHE 172,103247
doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2022.103247

It has been proposed that humans' exceptional locomotor endurance(???--MV) evolved partly with foraging in hot open habitats, and subsequently c 2 Ma ago with PH, for which endurance running was instrumental,
but PH by walking, if successful, could select for locomotor endurance ,even before the emergence of any running-related traits in human evolution.

Using a heat-exchange model validated here in 73 Hs & 55 ungulates, we simulated PHs for prey of 3 sizes (100, 250, 400 kg) & 3 sweating capacities (non-, low, high) at 6237 combinations:
- hunter's velocity 1–5 m/s, intermittent,
- air Tp 25–45 °C,
- rel.humidity 30–90 %,
- start time 8:00–16:00.

Our simulations predicted: walking would be successful in PH of low- & non-sweating prey, esp. under hot & humid conditions, but
- simulated PHs by walking yielded a 30–74 % lower success rate than hunts by (intermittent) running,
- despite requiring 10–30 % less energy, successful simulated PHs by walking were twice as long, and resulted in greater exhaustion of the hunter than hunts by (intermittent) running.
These shortcomings of pursuit by walking vs running identified in our simulations could explain why there is only a single direct description of PH by walking among modern hunter-gatherers.
Nevertheless, walking down prey could be a viable option for hominins who did not possess the endurance-running phenotype of the proposed first persistence hunter H.erectus.
Our simulation results suggest:
PH could select for both long-distance walking & endurance running, and contribute to the evolution of locomotor endurance seen in Hs.

______

Origins of the Human Predatory Pattern:
the Transition to Large-Animal Exploitation by Early Hominins
Jessica C Thompson cs 2019 Curr Anthr 60 doi org/10.1086/701477

The habitual consumption of large-animal resources (similar-sized, or larger than the consumer) separates human & non-human primate behavior.
Flaked stone tool use (another important hominin behavior) is often portrayed as being functionally related to this, by the necessity of a sharp edge for cutting animal tissue,
but most research on both issues emphasizes sites that postdate c 2 Ma.
We critically examine the theoretical significance of the earlier origins of these 2 behaviors, their proposed interrelationship & the nature of the empirical record.
We argue:
concepts of meat-eating & tool use are too loosely defined:
outside-bone nutrients (e.g. meat) & inside-bone nutrients (e.g. marrow, brains) have different macro-nutrient characteristics (protein vs fat), mechanical requirements for access (cutting vs percussion), search, handling & competitive costs, encounter rates & net returns:
they would have demanded distinct technological & behavioral solutions.
We propose:
the regular exploitation of large-animal resources (the “human predatory pattern”) began with an emphasis on percussion-based scavenging of inside-bone nutrients, independent of the emergence of flaked stone tool use.
This leads to a series of empirical test implications that differ from previous “meat-eating” origins scenarios.

______

"endurance-running phenotype"???
"human predatory pattern”??
:-DDD
Incredible: many traditional PAs still believe H.erectus ran after prey...

H.erectus had
- heavy & dense bones (pachy-osteo-sclerosis),
- flat feet (vs digiti- & unguligrade cursorials),
- rel. short tibias (He,Hn<Hs),
- platypelloidy + long femoral necks = femoral abduction,
- sweat water + salt in savanna???
- sea-otters use stone tools for opening shellfish,
- etc.etc.
H.erectus rarely if ever ran.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> We propose:
> the regular exploitation of large-animal resources (the “human predatory
> pattern”) began with an emphasis on percussion-based scavenging of inside-bone
> nutrients, independent of the emergence of flaked stone tool use.
> This leads to a series of empirical test implications that differ from previous
> “meat-eating” origins scenarios.

So they went from not eating meat or animal protein to smashing open bones
to get at the marrow, and this explains why they walked across the globe?

Look: "They picked up stuff & ate it."

That's it. That sparked "Aquatic Ape." They got easy, virtually limitless protein
by just standing on a beach, picking stuff up & eating it.

Done.

And that just so happens to have supplied everything they needed to grow
their brains just as big as genetics would allow.

And as soon as the pickings grew slim, or their numbers grew too large,
they moved along to a new stretch of beach where they stopped, picked
stuff up & ate it.

Again, done.

Just doing that they were going to reach everywhere from Oceania to
southern Africa.

Just from that, if a genetic mutation cropped up, allowed them to grow
bigger or smarter brains, they had the Omega-3s to do it.

Again, done.

The more upright they got, the deeper the water they could handle.

Shells were a great precursor to things like hand axes. They even
support more than a passing similarity in looks with some early
hand axes...

Spears were allowed a "Research & Development" stage. As a stick,
crooked or not, you could find shellfish with them. As a kid, digging
for Quahogs, I remember using a little hand rakes, for gardening. I
recall just scraping the sand just below the water line, feeling for
the shells underneath...

Anyway, I spear was useful for that even if it was crooked and not
useful for anything else. And that crooked, unperfected spear was
harmless. So you didn't get the fish? So what? You dug up more
shellfish...

Aquatic Ape allows you all the "Re4search & Development" time
you need to figure out the spear. And once you do, it's PERFECT
as a throwing spear.

Seriously, a spear perfect for cutting through the water, getting
that fish, is perfect for fighting air resistance!

Fire?

Did you know you can attract fish with fire?

Did you know that cooking shellfish with fire opens them? And
if they don't open that means they're bad?

Speaking of fire: Set that savanna on fire while you're living on
the savanna and you die.

"Oo! I know! Climb up into a tree! They're safe from fire."

(Guess again)

On a beach though, fire isn't that much of an issue. Nobody ever
set the sand on fire, burning their tribe alive...

So they had time. They had opportunity for "Research and
development." They didn't have to get any of these things right
the first time, or the 10 millionth time... they could take as long
as they needed.

Try doing that on a savanna, with a spear, facing a hyena
the size of a Volkswagen... or what seemed like the size of a
Volkswagon to something no bigger than a Lucy...

You needed that spear to work perfectly.

And try "Taking your time" to figure out the nuances of fire
on a savanna if you and the next generation are living on
that savanna.

Not. Pretty.

AND ALL THIS, the fire, the bigger brains, the spears, the
crossing the globe... all this just from being on a beach,
picking up stuff & eating it.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/703239506359353345