Villmoare Brian
Arizona State University, Department of Anthropology, Box 872402, Tempe, AZ 85287-2402, USA.
J Hum Evol. 2005 Dec;49(6):680-701. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2005.07.005. Epub 2005 Oct 3.
This paper proposes a statistical test of the single-species hypothesis using non-metric characters as a complement to statistical tests using more traditional metric characters. The sample examined is that of Asian and African Homo erectus. The paleoanthropological community is divided on the taxonomic distinction of these fossils, with workers arguing both for and against the species-level distinction between Asian and African populations. Previous arguments have focused on patterns of apparent morphological differentiation between the African and Asian cranial samples. To assess this question, three tests were performed that compared the range of variation in the fossil sample to a single-species group with a similar geographic distribution; this comparative sample was composed of 221 modern humans from Africa and Asia. For the first test, 23 metric characters were analyzed on the fossil and comparative samples. Using resampling procedures, the variation for these characters was examined, recreating 1000 samples from the human analogs and comparing the CV distributions of these samples to the CVs of the fossil group. The second test used the metric data to calculate a Euclidean distance between the African and Asian fossil samples. This distance was compared to a distribution of Euclidean distances calculated between 1000 randomly selected samples of African and Asian modern humans. For the third test, a grading scale was created for ten non-metric characters that encompassed the total morphological variation found in the fossil and modern human samples. The Manhattan distance between the Asian and African fossil samples was calculated and compared to a distribution of distances calculated between 1000 randomly selected samples of African and Asian moderns. The first two tests, using the metric data, failed to falsify the null hypothesis. However, in the third test, using non-metric data, the total Manhattan distance for the fossil sample approached the 100th percentile of the resampled distances calculated from the moderns. The implications of the contrasting results are discussed.
本文提出了一种使用非度量性状对单物种假说进行的统计检验,作为对使用更传统度量性状的统计检验的补充。所检验的样本是亚洲和非洲直立人的样本。古人类学界在这些化石的分类区别上存在分歧,研究人员对亚洲和非洲种群在物种水平上的区别持支持和反对两种观点。以往的争论集中在非洲和亚洲颅骨样本之间明显的形态分化模式上。为了评估这个问题,进行了三项测试,将化石样本的变异范围与具有相似地理分布的单物种群体进行比较;这个比较样本由来自非洲和亚洲的221名现代人类组成。对于第一次测试,对化石样本和比较样本分析了23个度量性状。使用重采样程序,检查这些性状的变异,从人类类似样本中重新创建1000个样本,并将这些样本的CV分布与化石组的CV进行比较。第二次测试使用度量数据计算非洲和亚洲化石样本之间的欧几里得距离。将这个距离与在1000个随机选择的非洲和亚洲现代人类样本之间计算的欧几里得距离分布进行比较。对于第三次测试,为十个非度量性状创建了一个分级量表,这些性状涵盖了化石样本和现代人类样本中发现的总体形态变异。计算了亚洲和非洲化石样本之间的曼哈顿距离,并将其与在1000个随机选择的非洲和亚洲现代人样本之间计算的距离分布进行比较。前两次使用度量数据的测试未能证伪零假设。然而,在第三次使用非度量数据的测试中,化石样本的总曼哈顿距离接近从现代人重新采样计算出的距离的第100百分位数。讨论了对比结果的含义。