|
|
Niche, not "bipedal niche"
J. Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
Sat, 30 Sep 95 11:11:00 -0500
Cl> Of course, once the now-hominid was bipedal, it would be in
Cl> a position to take advantage of the bipedal mosaic savannah
Cl> niche.
Cl> Tom Clarke
I imagine you'll think this is nit-picking, but it isn't:
There is, and can be, no such thing as a "bipedal mosaic savannah
niche", or in fact a "bipedal niche" of any kind. There was a
mosaic savannah niche available for a medium-sized omnivore. It
wouldn't matter whether the omnivore that used it was bipedal or
quadrupedal, primate or any other animal. It just happens that
a predominately bipedal primate would do well in such an available
niche, for a number of reasons, such as a primate's (and especially
an ape's) relatively high intelligence, their heavy reliance on
eyesight, and their carrying abilities. These last two are also
enhanced, in open country, by bipedalism. Bipedalism allows one
to see over more grass and brush even while moving, and allows
carrying objects, such as food or tools, further with greater ease
(i.e., while remaining in a naturally comfortable position).
Jim Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
* Q-Blue 2.0 *
|