Stefania Wilks

Anth.1020-007
Reflection
Jenny Campbell
11/06/2015

Running on My Own Two

Feet

www.scienceagogo.com

I love to run on the trails in the mountains near my home but running on primitive
trails can be tricky business. There are many, varied obstacles like roots, rocks, and
ruts. Occasionally, in the dappled light of the leaves, Ive miscalculated depth or
overlooked a root and tripped. Most of the time I can right myself before I impact
but once or twice I havent balanced in time and have landed heavily, ending up
with scraped skin, a bruised wrist, or swollen lip. In September, I slipped on some
wet turf while playing tag, twisted my knee and tore my ACL and medial meniscus.
Surgery and physical therapy are helping me to walk on my own again but this
experience has made me reflect about my ability to walk and run.
Dinosaurs were bipedal, birds are bipedal but humans are the only primates that
can stand, walk and run on two feet completely. The evolution of bipedalism is
central to the evolution of hominids and has required many physiological
changes/separations from our ancestral cladate cousins. Briefly; our feet required

specialized evolution with the big toe joining the others and development of a welldefined arch. Pelvic bones were shortened and rounded, femurs inclined at the
knee, the rib cage became conical, the spine curved and attached to the skull in a
more central location, all of which to lowered our center of gravity and created the
stability necessary to balance top heavy weight on two legs rather than four like the
rest of our family.
Evolution isnt about progress or being the best. Nature doesnt give a damn, it
just happens it follows random mutations that allow reproductive fitness/survival
through the next generation. So what selective pressures created such a unique and
original change? When quadrapedalism is so effective, efficient, and predominant,
why standing tall on two feet?
Alternate Hypotheses:
1. Bipedalism frees up the hands for tool use: This hypothesis represents
some of the oldest ideas involving bipedalism. Charles Darwin was impressed by
what he considered to be strong visual similarities between aboriginal peoples
and giant apes. In his book, Descent of Man, published in 1871, he based his
conjectured that hominids would have been better able to use tools and
weapons to hunt or defend themselves if they could stand, walk, or run.
Unfortunately, fossil evidence tells us that bipedalism had conclusively evolved
by 4Mya and most likely, to some degree, a couple million years before.
Evidence for the use of stone tools, created to enhance survival, dates 2Mya,
much later than bipedalism so it is more likely that the culture involving the use
of hand tools evolved due to our ability to stand erect and walk on two
specialized feet not vice versa.
2. Bipedalism evolved from new feeding and dietary habits: One group of
anthropologists suggest that climateary changes forced early hominids to spend
more time out of the trees and foraging on the ground. They would be required
to stand while using their hands to harvest a variety of seeds from tall grasses
and or stand to collect small fruit from small trees, maybe even climb to a large
lateral branch and stand to collect the fruit. It would have been much easier
shuffling between branches and used less energy than raising themselves up
from repeatedly lowering and raising the quadrupedal positions into the
branches. Over long time, their skeletal structures would have adapted to allow
them to spend all of their time standing and walking erect, making it easier to
collect the calories needed. Immediately following the bipedal adaptation,
dentition occurred. As generalized foragers, the hominids evolved additional
molars. (Conroy, 2005)

3. Bipedalism attracts Mates: In 1981, Biological Anthropologist, Owen C.

Lovejoy introduced an alternative to the reason for bipedalism. He suggests
males forged larger radials in order to provide for a monogamous mate and
offspring. He based his reasoning on the stratified feeding habits of observed
modern primates. Male chimpanzees feed in lower branches, while females and
offspring forage in upper arboreal branches. Lovejoy hypothesized that larger
males foraged, bipedally, further in an effort to find calories for a pair-bonded
female and offspring, nesting in a secure location, in order to establish
reproductive fitness. He may have dragged protein from meat kills, his own or
scavenged, because fruit and seed couldnt be carried in his arms and would
have needed a container. These additional calorie sources would have ensured
offspring/reproductive fitness. This model follows avian examples more than
primate examples. Most primate offspring rely on female responsibility for
dependent infants more than male interaction. (Lovejoy, 1981)
4. Bipedalism evolved because it was energetically efficient: testing of
Chimpanzees and humans have concluded that walking on two feet is
energetically more efficient then quadrupedal travel. Biological anthropologists
have concluded that bipedalism walking expends 50% less energy than
quadrupedal walking. Running is not energetically efficient but early hominids
could have spent a lot less energy simply waling and following wounded prey
until its death and then carrying it back to the others. (Conroy, 2005)
5. Bipedalism reduces the amount of water necessary to forage long
distances: P.E. Wheeler described the ability of bipedal primates to utilize
evaporative cooling in order to travel in extreme temperature conditions.
Eventually hair loss resulted from the bipedal foraging. Naked skin allowed
hominids to forage longer in more extreme heats with the need for water.
(Wheeler, 1992)
6. Bipedalism evolved from aquatic interaction: One of the most interesting
hypothesis involves primates and water. In 1960, Alister Hardy introduced the
idea that primates evolved bipedal tendencies because of the time they spent in
water, i.e. oases gathering food stuffs such as lily pads and rushes. This
hypothesis revolved around the idea that primates sought food sources in the
scattered oases in the arid African savannas. This hypothesis has been long
ridiculed but has inspired many imaginations, especially screen writers and
fictional authors.

After exploring the different hypotheses for bipedalism, I feel I believe a

combination of ideas could have led to the evolution of bipedalism. I think that
originally, hominids would have developed bipedalism in order to gather small
fruits and seed from arid savanna climates. Eventually the physiological changes
would have led to an efficiency of bipedal walking for long distances, which
would have contributed to the ability to forage greater areas in order to find the
needed caloric intake. Bipedalism provided the ability to use less energy
expenditure and daily water needs in the effort to provide calories, thus the
reduction in hair. This would have allowed a much greater foraging range for all
transitional primate/hominids. I dont think that this foraging behavior led to
monogamous behavior in early hominids. Nor do I believe Lovejoys hypothesis
that males brought food to their mate and offspring. While avians species exhibit
this nesting behavior, there are no examples of this in primate behavior.

References
Conroy, Glenn C. (2005) Behavioral Theories for the Evolution of Bipedalism.
Reconstructing Human Origins 2ed. WW Norton & Company, Inc. p272-275.
Conroy, Glenn C. (2005) Thermoregulation and Bipedalism. Reconstructing Human
Origins 2ed. WW Norton & Company, Inc. p337-343.
Wheeler, P.E. (1992) The influence of the loss of functional body hair on the water
budgets of early hominids. Journal of Human Evolution 23. School of Natural
Sciences, Liverpool. . p379-388.
Lovejoy, Owen C. (1981) The Origin of Man. Science, Vol.211, Number 4480. 23 Jan
1981. p341-350.
Hardy, Alister C. (1960) Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? The New Scientist, 7. 17
Mar 1960. p642-645.