BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture - ECPv6.16.5.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://bec.ucla.edu
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Los_Angeles
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20100314T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20101107T090000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20110313T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20111106T090000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20120311T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20121104T090000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110502T000000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110502T000000
DTSTAMP:20201013T004820Z
CREATED:20200922T214902Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201013T004820Z
UID:4171-1304294400-1304294400@bec.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Siobhán M. Mattison - Kinship and market integration among the ethnic Mosuo of Southwest China
DESCRIPTION:Siobhán M. Mattison: Stanford University Department of Anthropology and Morrison Institute for Population and Resource StudiesThe study of kinship is foundational to anthropology. Though interest in kinship waned briefly\, it has recently been rekindled\, particularly in the area of evolutionary ecology. In this talk\, I review briefly the major trends in anthropological thought on kinship and\, by way of example\, explore the contributions that evolutionary and quantitative studies have made to its study. In doing so\, I consider the ethnic Mosuo of Southwest China\, a population that traditionally was matrilineal and engaged in subsistence agro-pastoralism\, but that recently has become integrated into the wider market economy. I discuss evidence for associated change in kinship practices\, arguing that such change is at least partially consistent with hypotheses from evolutionary ecology. I consider several topics of traditional interest to kinship theorists\, including marriage\, residence and inheritance and conclude by emphasizing the need to synthesize often disparate findings and by suggesting several avenues of future research.http://bec.ucla.edu/papers/Mattison.pdfhttp://bec.ucla.edu/papers/Mattison1.pdfhttp://bec.ucla.edu/papers/Mattison2.pdf
URL:https://bec.ucla.edu/event/siobhan-m-mattison-kinship-and-market-integration-among-the-ethnic-mosuo-of-southwest-china/
CATEGORIES:Past Presentation,Presentation
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110509T000000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110509T000000
DTSTAMP:20201013T004819Z
CREATED:20200922T214902Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201013T004819Z
UID:4172-1304899200-1304899200@bec.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Peter Nonacs - Is Kin Selection Dead and Is It Time to Move On in Understanding the Evolution of Cooperation?
DESCRIPTION:Peter Nonacs: UCLA Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyHamilton’s theory of inclusive fitness broadly states that whether or not a trait increases in frequency is dependent on both the direct reproductive success of individuals having that trait and the help that such individuals can provide to other trait bearers for their reproduction.  The latter portion of inclusive fitness is commonly known as kin selection and has become the dominant paradigm for the evolution of cooperation: I.e.\, helping genetic relatives reproduce can create a net increase in inclusive fitness even with a substantial loss in direct reproduction.  Recently\, however\, Martin Nowak has argued that the mathematical foundations of inclusive fitness theory are inappropriate for predicting the evolution of cooperation (1).  Edward O. Wilson has gone even further and claimed that\, “Kin selection is wrong” and a “gimmick” (2).  Instead\, Wilson proposes cooperation evolves through group selection.  Not surprisingly\, their claims have drawn considerable criticism (3)\, with Richard Dawkins going so far as to pronounce that he has “never met anybody apart from Wilson and Nowak who takes it seriously (2).”  I will look at both sides of this issue and attempt to separate the scientific concerns from the heated clashes of personalities.  At issue appears to be the question of the evolutionary advantages of genetic diversity versus kinship.  Both can be advantageous\, but they are simultaneously incompatible.  Their resolution requires a multi-level approach as nepotism favoring kin can be selected for within groups\, but genetic diversity is selected for only across groups. \n(1) Nowak et al. 2010. Nature 466: 1057-1062. \n(2) http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/04/17/where_does_good_come_from/?page=full \n(3) Abbot et al. 2011. Nature 471: E1-E4.
URL:https://bec.ucla.edu/event/peter-nonacs-is-kin-selection-dead-and-is-it-time-to-move-on-in-understanding-the-evolution-of-cooperation/
CATEGORIES:Past Presentation,Presentation
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110516T000000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110516T000000
DTSTAMP:20201013T004819Z
CREATED:20200922T214903Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201013T004819Z
UID:4173-1305504000-1305504000@bec.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Mary K. Shenk - Why Does Fertility Decline?  Comparing Evolutionary Models of the Demographic Transition
DESCRIPTION:Mary K. Shenk: University of Missouri Department of AnthropologyEvolutionary anthropologists have given significant attention to the global phenomenon of the demographic transition\, especially the remarkable decreases in fertility that characterize it.  The literature is crowded with competing theories and sub-theories\, and scholars often call for more comprehensive\, better-controlled studies that would allow us to distinguish between competing causal models—yet only limited comparative work has previously been done.  This paper compares evolutionary models emphasizing decreasing risk\, changing motivations for parental investment\, and changing forms of cultural transmission as motivations for fertility decline. The goal is to determine which model\, or combination of models\, produces the most robust explanation of a rapid\, recent demographic transition in rural Bangladesh. \nModels are compared using an evidence-based statistical approach employing model selection techniques derived from likelihood theory.  This approach allows quantification of the relative degree of support the data give to alternative models\, even when model predictions are not mutually exclusive. Data come from a new survey conducted in rural Bangladesh in 2010 designed specifically for comparative testing.  Results suggest that models emphasizing changing motivations for parental investment\, including increasing payoffs to investment as well as increasing costs of and competition between children\, are the best predictors of fertility decline.  Yet findings also indicate that a full explanation involves variables from multiple models\, and that important causal synergies underlie key predictors such as education\, suggesting that multiple causal pathways are likely to be implicated in the rapidity and degree of recent demographic transitions.
URL:https://bec.ucla.edu/event/mary-k-shenk-why-does-fertility-decline-comparing-evolutionary-models-of-the-demographic-transition/
CATEGORIES:Past Presentation,Presentation
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110518T000000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110518T000000
DTSTAMP:20201013T004819Z
CREATED:20200922T214925Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201013T004819Z
UID:4175-1305676800-1305676800@bec.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Federico Rossano - Structure and Development of Gestural Communication in Great Apes
DESCRIPTION:Federico Rossano: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary AnthropologyIn this talk I address two crucial aspects of gestural communication in non-human primates: how gestures are acquired/developed and how similar is their use when compared to human behavior (in particular with respect to issues such as communicative intentions and recipient design).\nThere is general agreement among researchers that nonhuman primates gesture in sophisticated ways (Tomasello & Call\, 2007; Pollick & de Waal\, 2007). However\, the process by which apes acquire gestures is an issue of debate. One of the central questions in this debate is whether apes acquire species-typical gestural repertoires\, with little individual innovation (the “biological inheritance” hypothesis) (e.g.\, Genty et al.\, 2009)\, or whether they develop gestures individually through the ritualization of particular social acts (the “ontogenetic ritualization” hypothesis) (e.g.\, Tomasello\, 1996). In the first part of the talk\, I address this question by examining the relationship between the structure of a particular social interaction and the form of the gestures used to elicit that interaction. I present data on nine mother-infant Bonobo pairs as they engage in a particular social interaction: co-locomotion via a ventral or dorsal carry and I show how ontogenetic ritualization is the best account for the development of their gestural repertoire.  \nIn the second part of the talk I present an ongoing study on food sharing in great apes\, with particular focus on how they perform offers and requests and how other group members recognize and respond to these intentional actions. The main focus will be on Orang-Utangs and Chimpanzees. \nIn this work I start from actions (functions) and their sequential unfolding\, rather than on specific gestural forms investigated out of context. \nGenty\, E.\, Breuer\, T.\, Hobaiter\, C. & Byrne\, R. W. (2009). Gestural communication of\nthe gorilla (Gorilla gorilla): repertoire\, intentionality and possible origins. Animal Cognition\, 12\, 527-546. \nPollick\, A. S. & de Waal\, F. B. M. (2007). Ape gestures and language evolution.\nProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\, 104(19)\, 8184-8189. \nTomasello\, M. (1996). Do apes ape? In B. G. Galef & C. M. Heyes (Eds.)\, Social\nLearning in Animals: The Roots of Culture (pp. 319-346). San Diego: Academic\nPress. \nTomasello\, M. & Call. J. (2007). Comparing the gestures of apes and monkeys. In J. Call\n& M. Tomasello (Eds.)\, The gestural communication of apes and monkeys (pp. 197-220). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.
URL:https://bec.ucla.edu/event/federico-rossano-structure-and-development-of-gestural-communication-in-great-apes/
CATEGORIES:Past Presentation,Presentation
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110523T000000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20110523T000000
DTSTAMP:20201013T004819Z
CREATED:20200922T214924Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20201013T004819Z
UID:4174-1306108800-1306108800@bec.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Charles Perreault - The pace of cultural evolution
DESCRIPTION:Charles Perreault: UCLA Department of AnthropologyHumans adaptive radiation has been explained by our capacity to socially learn information (culture). Culture is an inheritance system that parallels and interacts with the genetic one. Cultural variation and innovations accumulate in a population throughout time\, allowing for complex cultural adaptations to evolve. Since\, it is assumed\, cultural evolution occurs faster on average than biological evolution\, humans can adapt to new ecosystems more rapidly than other animals. The assumption that cultural evolution is faster than biological evolution\, however\, has never been empirically tested. In this talk I will suggest that human technologies typically change more rapidly than animal morphologies. Like biological evolution\, rates of cultural evolution are inversely correlated with the time interval over which they are measured. This correlation explains in part why the pace of change in technologies appears faster when measured over recent time intervals\, where taphonomic intervals are often shorter.
URL:https://bec.ucla.edu/event/charles-perreault-the-pace-of-cultural-evolution/
CATEGORIES:Past Presentation,Presentation
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR