- The document discusses early stone tool technologies, beginning with Oldowan tools dated to 3.4 million years ago which were made and used by Australopithecus afarensis.
- Acheulean tools emerged around 1.8 million years ago and were more sophisticated, consisting of bifacial hand axes, cleavers, and picks. These tools spread widely and suggested more advanced cognition among humans.
- Acheulean handaxes are believed to have taken on social significance beyond just functionality, with elaborate examples perhaps serving to display skills or used in mate selection by early humans.
Yr 7 History comparison of Palaeolithic and Neolithic Ages. Adapted from http://www.slideshare.net/jessieleininger?utm_campaign=profiletracking&utm_medium=sssite&utm_source=ssslideview
Yr 7 History comparison of Palaeolithic and Neolithic Ages. Adapted from http://www.slideshare.net/jessieleininger?utm_campaign=profiletracking&utm_medium=sssite&utm_source=ssslideview
Part 1 of the Stone Ages.
Covers early man through Mesolithic Era.
Concentrates on hunter-gatherers and early migration.
All images were found using google search. I do not own any of them.
Part 1 of the Stone Ages.
Covers early man through Mesolithic Era.
Concentrates on hunter-gatherers and early migration.
All images were found using google search. I do not own any of them.
Evolution is a process that results in changes that are passed on or inherited from generation, which help organisms survive, reproduce, and raise offspring. These changes become common throughout a population, leading to new species.
Biological evolution explains how all living things evolved from a single common ancestor, but any two species may be separated by millions or billions of years.
This species was bipedal, fully erect, and capable of grasping tools and weapons with its forearms. These fossil specimens have a larger brain size of 600 cubic centimeters (37 cubic inches), as well as a jaw and tooth size more akin to modern humans.
-Fossil skulls contain tangible evidence of unequal brain development, which is mirrored in the way stone tools were formed.
-The earliest of our ancestors to show a significant increase in brain size and also the first to be found associated with stone tools
Comparing Evolved Extractive Text Summary Scores of Bidirectional Encoder Rep...University of Maribor
Slides from:
11th International Conference on Electrical, Electronics and Computer Engineering (IcETRAN), Niš, 3-6 June 2024
Track: Artificial Intelligence
https://www.etran.rs/2024/en/home-english/
Professional air quality monitoring systems provide immediate, on-site data for analysis, compliance, and decision-making.
Monitor common gases, weather parameters, particulates.
The ability to recreate computational results with minimal effort and actionable metrics provides a solid foundation for scientific research and software development. When people can replicate an analysis at the touch of a button using open-source software, open data, and methods to assess and compare proposals, it significantly eases verification of results, engagement with a diverse range of contributors, and progress. However, we have yet to fully achieve this; there are still many sociotechnical frictions.
Inspired by David Donoho's vision, this talk aims to revisit the three crucial pillars of frictionless reproducibility (data sharing, code sharing, and competitive challenges) with the perspective of deep software variability.
Our observation is that multiple layers — hardware, operating systems, third-party libraries, software versions, input data, compile-time options, and parameters — are subject to variability that exacerbates frictions but is also essential for achieving robust, generalizable results and fostering innovation. I will first review the literature, providing evidence of how the complex variability interactions across these layers affect qualitative and quantitative software properties, thereby complicating the reproduction and replication of scientific studies in various fields.
I will then present some software engineering and AI techniques that can support the strategic exploration of variability spaces. These include the use of abstractions and models (e.g., feature models), sampling strategies (e.g., uniform, random), cost-effective measurements (e.g., incremental build of software configurations), and dimensionality reduction methods (e.g., transfer learning, feature selection, software debloating).
I will finally argue that deep variability is both the problem and solution of frictionless reproducibility, calling the software science community to develop new methods and tools to manage variability and foster reproducibility in software systems.
Exposé invité Journées Nationales du GDR GPL 2024
Toxic effects of heavy metals : Lead and Arsenicsanjana502982
Heavy metals are naturally occuring metallic chemical elements that have relatively high density, and are toxic at even low concentrations. All toxic metals are termed as heavy metals irrespective of their atomic mass and density, eg. arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, thallium, chromium, etc.
Slide 1: Title Slide
Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Slide 2: Introduction to Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Definition: Extrachromosomal inheritance refers to the transmission of genetic material that is not found within the nucleus.
Key Components: Involves genes located in mitochondria, chloroplasts, and plasmids.
Slide 3: Mitochondrial Inheritance
Mitochondria: Organelles responsible for energy production.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA): Circular DNA molecule found in mitochondria.
Inheritance Pattern: Maternally inherited, meaning it is passed from mothers to all their offspring.
Diseases: Examples include Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) and mitochondrial myopathy.
Slide 4: Chloroplast Inheritance
Chloroplasts: Organelles responsible for photosynthesis in plants.
Chloroplast DNA (cpDNA): Circular DNA molecule found in chloroplasts.
Inheritance Pattern: Often maternally inherited in most plants, but can vary in some species.
Examples: Variegation in plants, where leaf color patterns are determined by chloroplast DNA.
Slide 5: Plasmid Inheritance
Plasmids: Small, circular DNA molecules found in bacteria and some eukaryotes.
Features: Can carry antibiotic resistance genes and can be transferred between cells through processes like conjugation.
Significance: Important in biotechnology for gene cloning and genetic engineering.
Slide 6: Mechanisms of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Non-Mendelian Patterns: Do not follow Mendel’s laws of inheritance.
Cytoplasmic Segregation: During cell division, organelles like mitochondria and chloroplasts are randomly distributed to daughter cells.
Heteroplasmy: Presence of more than one type of organellar genome within a cell, leading to variation in expression.
Slide 7: Examples of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Four O’clock Plant (Mirabilis jalapa): Shows variegated leaves due to different cpDNA in leaf cells.
Petite Mutants in Yeast: Result from mutations in mitochondrial DNA affecting respiration.
Slide 8: Importance of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Evolution: Provides insight into the evolution of eukaryotic cells.
Medicine: Understanding mitochondrial inheritance helps in diagnosing and treating mitochondrial diseases.
Agriculture: Chloroplast inheritance can be used in plant breeding and genetic modification.
Slide 9: Recent Research and Advances
Gene Editing: Techniques like CRISPR-Cas9 are being used to edit mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA.
Therapies: Development of mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) for preventing mitochondrial diseases.
Slide 10: Conclusion
Summary: Extrachromosomal inheritance involves the transmission of genetic material outside the nucleus and plays a crucial role in genetics, medicine, and biotechnology.
Future Directions: Continued research and technological advancements hold promise for new treatments and applications.
Slide 11: Questions and Discussion
Invite Audience: Open the floor for any questions or further discussion on the topic.
Seminar of U.V. Spectroscopy by SAMIR PANDASAMIR PANDA
Spectroscopy is a branch of science dealing the study of interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter.
Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy refers to absorption spectroscopy or reflect spectroscopy in the UV-VIS spectral region.
Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy is an analytical method that can measure the amount of light received by the analyte.
Deep Behavioral Phenotyping in Systems Neuroscience for Functional Atlasing a...Ana Luísa Pinho
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) provides means to characterize brain activations in response to behavior. However, cognitive neuroscience has been limited to group-level effects referring to the performance of specific tasks. To obtain the functional profile of elementary cognitive mechanisms, the combination of brain responses to many tasks is required. Yet, to date, both structural atlases and parcellation-based activations do not fully account for cognitive function and still present several limitations. Further, they do not adapt overall to individual characteristics. In this talk, I will give an account of deep-behavioral phenotyping strategies, namely data-driven methods in large task-fMRI datasets, to optimize functional brain-data collection and improve inference of effects-of-interest related to mental processes. Key to this approach is the employment of fast multi-functional paradigms rich on features that can be well parametrized and, consequently, facilitate the creation of psycho-physiological constructs to be modelled with imaging data. Particular emphasis will be given to music stimuli when studying high-order cognitive mechanisms, due to their ecological nature and quality to enable complex behavior compounded by discrete entities. I will also discuss how deep-behavioral phenotyping and individualized models applied to neuroimaging data can better account for the subject-specific organization of domain-general cognitive systems in the human brain. Finally, the accumulation of functional brain signatures brings the possibility to clarify relationships among tasks and create a univocal link between brain systems and mental functions through: (1) the development of ontologies proposing an organization of cognitive processes; and (2) brain-network taxonomies describing functional specialization. To this end, tools to improve commensurability in cognitive science are necessary, such as public repositories, ontology-based platforms and automated meta-analysis tools. I will thus discuss some brain-atlasing resources currently under development, and their applicability in cognitive as well as clinical neuroscience.
2. Are we the only species that make and use tools?
• Crows fashion hooks from
leaves and fish for bugs
(Corballis, 2002)
• Chimps fishing for termites
e.g. Goodall 1963 (Gombe
chimps)
• Bonobos use rocks and
pieces of wood to hammer
open nuts
• Vultures use stones to open
eggs
3. Are we the only species that make and use tools?
4. Are we the only species that make and use tools?
5. Are we the only species that make and use tools?
From: Davidson, I & McGrew,
W.C. (2005). Stone tools and
the uniqueness of human
culture. J. Roy. Anthrop. Inst.
(N.S.) 11, 793-817
6. Paleolithic ChronologyPaleolithic Chronology
•Basal Paleolithic: 3.4 mya – 1.75 mya
•Lower Paleolithic: 1.75 mya – 250 kya
•Middle Paleolithic: 250 kya – 40 kya
•Upper Paleolithic: 40 kya –18 kya
•Epipaleolithic: 18 kya –12 kya
•Mesolithic: starts & ends at different times in different places.
•Neolithic: starts & ends at different times in different places.
7. Oldowan tools
• Earliest tool use…Leakey
et al. at Olduvai gorge in
1960s..hence “Oldowan” tool
industry
12. Oldowan tools
•then thought to be the product of Homo habilis
• although Homo rudolfensis in Ethiopia may be older (2.5.
to 2.6 million years ago) and may have also used tools
18. Some key sites:
Ounda Gona, Ethiopia, 2.6 million years ago:
core-flake tools and cutmarked bones (equid, bovid); highly selective raw
material use
Kada Gona, Ethiopia, 2.52-2.60 MYA - core-flake tools
Bouri, Ethopia, 2.5 MYA - cut marked animal bones,
Omo, Shungura, Ethiopia
Oldowan Industry
19. Oldowan Tool
Typology:
Toth, Nicholas. 1985. The
Oldowan Reassessed: A Close
Look at Early Stone Artifacts.
Journal of Archaeological
Science. 12, 101-120.
20. • were our ancestors scavengers? carnivore tooth marks on
bones…
from Johanson & Edgar (2001). From Lucy to Language. New
York: Nevraumont Publishing,
21. Oldowan tools
• Oldowan tools may suggest something about the
cognitive capacities of their creators. For example.
according to Toth & Schick (In Gibson and Toth, 1994)
Tools, Language etc.):
• the ability to recognise the correct angles on stone cores
for flaking
• good hand-eye coordination for hammering etc.
• strong power grip as well as precision grips? Bimanual
coordination?
• they seemed to transport their tools..carried appropriate
flints etc. a considerable distance from their source. Tools
often found in great concentrations in a single site, etc.
22. Oldowan tools
• hard hammer
percussion crucial for
creation of flake and core
tools…
• grip capabilities plus
stress resistance in fossil
hominins might indicate
crude tool use…
• A. africanus? 2.4 to 3
m.y.a.?
Panger et al. (2002)
23. Oldowan tools
Oldowan technology probably not a
major breakthrough beyond the
capacities of other ape-like species
Kanzi has learned to make stone
tools (Toth et al. 1993)
27. Acheulean tools
• more sophisticated: bifacial hand axes, cleavers, picks etc.
• around 1.8 million years ago? 400 ky after the appearance of
H.ergaster
•spread to Middle East, Europe, India and Indonesia.
28. Acheulean
It was the dominant technology for the
vast majority of human history.
Their distinctive oval and pear-shaped
handaxes have been found over a
wide area and some examples
attained a very high level of
sophistication suggesting that the
roots of human art, economy and
social organization arose as a result
of their development.
31. Use
Use-wear analysis on Acheulean tools suggests there was generally no
specialization in the different types created and that they were multi-use
implements.
Functions included cutting animal carcasses as well as scraping and
cutting hides when necessary. Some tools may have been better suited to
digging roots or butchering animals than others however.
A large and carefully crafted handaxes may have served a social as well
as functional purpose.
Alternative theories include a use for ovate hand-axes as a kind of hunting
discus to be hurled at prey. Puzzlingly, there are also examples of sites
where hundreds of hand-axes, many impractically large and also
apparently unused, have been found in close association together.
33. Recently, it has been suggested that the Acheulean tool users adopted the
handaxe as a social artifact, meaning that it embodied something beyond
its function of a butchery or wood cutting tool.
Knowing how to create and use these tools would have been a valuable
skill and the more elaborate ones suggest that they played a role in their
owners' identity and their interactions with others.
This would help explain the apparent over-sophistication of some
examples which may represent a "historically accrued social significance".
One theory goes further and suggests that some special hand-axes were
made and displayed by males in search of mate, using a large, well-made
hand-axe to demonstrate that they possessed sufficient strength and skill
to pass on to their offspring. Once they had attracted a female at a group
gathering, it is suggested that they would discard their axes, perhaps
explaining why so many are found together.
Symbolism
35. Hallam L. Movius
The Movius Line is a theoretical line
drawn across northern India first proposed
by the American archaeologist Hallam L.
Movius in 1948 to demonstrate a
technological difference between the early
prehistoric tool technologies of the east
and west of the Old World.
One argument is that paranthropus (that gracile australopithicine—might be A boisi—I can’t keep them straight) used stone tools as a scavenger—i.e. bone marrow from carcasses. This use of an improved dietary source might have driven subsequent brain expansion and speciation that came later.
MC = metacarpal
chimps may have the necessary motor skills for these tasks. In captivity they can do up their shirts and even tie shoelaces (allegedly). Toth & Schick, 1994 in Toth and Gibson book.
nice description of Toth and Savage-Rumbaugh’s work with Kanzi on stone flakes at http://natzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1995/6/chippingaway.cfm
Note that Kanzi was taught to make flakes by Toth and Savage-Rumbaugh and co. This distinction is important in the literature. Is a species capable of doing it? Does a species actually do it in the wild?
and feel free to visit the famous monkeys through history page!!!
http://www.ape-o-naut.org/famous/famous/reallife.html
A longish (un-peer reviewed of course!) video about Bonobos including Kanzi making tools is here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/76
I also found a paper which seems to discuss some of the limitations of clever tool use (think Kohlers chimps on Tenerife):
Raking it in: the impact of enculturation on chimpanzee tool use
E. E. Furlong · K. J. Boose · S. T. Boysen
Animal Cognition (in press)
DOI 10.1007/s10071-007-0091-6