1 Meaning and Scope of Biological Anthropology

Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal

Contents of this unit

1. Introduction: Bio-physical anthropology

2. Four basic divisions of anthropology

3. Human beings—The central figure of anthropology

4. Human diversities

5. New physical anthropology

6. Biological anthropology- a new concept

7. Applied physical anthropology

8. Scope of bio-physical anthropology

9. Major divisions of physical anthropology

10. Summary

Learning objectives:

• This module will introduce the students to the basic concept, meaning and scope of Biological Anthropology.

• This module will explain how human being acts as the central figure of Anthropology

• This module also elucidate the major divisions of Biological/ physical Anthropology

1. Introduction: Bio-Physical Anthropology

The term anthropology has been derived from two Greek words, anthropo and logos. The meaning of the former is man and the latter, science. Therefore, anthropology is the science of man/human. But its scope differs from that of the other sciences dealing with human. Anthropology studies the different aspects of the life of human, right from the date of his origin up to the present day- for example, its physical features, differences, cultural variations, social, political, religious, and other affairs (Andrews and Stringer, 1989; Jaiswal, 2013).

Herskovits has rightly remarked that anthropology is the study of man and his work. But the exact definition of anthropology had aroused many problematic situations in the former days. Broca defined it as the natural history of the genus Homo and the “Science whose objective is the study of humanity considered as a whole, in its parts, and in relationship to the rest of nature”. Serge, in the year 1932, conducted an international survey when he invited the personal opinion regarding the definitions of the terms anthropology and ethnology, and also the boundary between these two fields from seventy one scholars in this line. But the opinions became heterogeneous due to the inter-dependences of many other branches of sciences with anthropology in each step of the letters advances towards development (Andrews, 1984).

2. Four Basic Divisions of Anthropology

Anthropology has four separate branches—(1) Physical or Biological Anthropology, (2) Cultural or social Anthropology, (3) Prehistoric Archaeology and (4) Linguistic Anthropology.

The Physical or Biological Anthropology branch deals with the physical aspects of human evolution, structural variations, racial composition, etc. Physical anthropologists take into consideration the facts, like the skin-colour of man in different countries, the character of hair, size and shape of nose, stature, etc., and then try to classify the people of the world in different groups based on the similarities of physical characteristic. In doing this, they also collect the bones of ancient men from the different layer of the earth and try to give comparative analysis with modern men (Jaiswal, 2013).

On the other hand, the subject matter of cultural anthropology deals with the life-activities of man. The cultural anthropologists study man as a cultural being. The different works, behaviour, and social patterns of man are the main points of study of this branch of science. In studying this, a cultural anthropologist collects the various social and cultural activities of man from the different societies of the world and analyzes them comparatively. He also gathered facts from the prehistoric periods which helped him in studying the development of culture through the ages. On the whole, we see that the centre of focus of anthropological studies is Man as a unique creation of Nature.

Prehistoric Archaeology, the study of cultural variation over time, focuses on artifacts, constructions, or other evidence of human activities. Its techniques are used to investigate prehistory, or to provide physical evidence of contemporary events such as locating historical structures. Archaeological techniques of excavation and documentation are also sometimes used to recover evidence from a crime scene. The terms bioarchaeologist and zoo archaeologist identify specialists who deal with human or other animal bones from archaeological sites (Jaiswal, 2013).

Linguistic Anthropology studies human communication systems. Its topics range from language to the dynamics of human interaction.

3. Man—The Central Figure of Anthropology

Man’s first appearance on the earth is a wonderful happening. The creation of the earth itself is also a mystery. It so happened that the sun, in its courses, came nearer to a star many times larger than the former owing to some natural reasons. As a result of the greater planetary attraction certain gaseous substances came out of the body of the sun. In the meantime, larger star went far away from the sun. The gaseous substances that came out of the sun began to lengthen and cool down. After sometime these gave rise to eight rounded bodies- “the planets”. The earth is one of the planets. Gradually the earth cooled down by radiation, and then it experienced a continuous heavy shower which created the ocean, the seas, the rivers and channels on its surface. After a long time, when the conditions became favorable, life appeared on the earth. With our present state of knowledge regarding the earth and life, we cannot explain the process of the beginning of life. But from the geological and palaeontological evidences, we can easily say that the first life on the earth was a unicellular organism e.g. Amoeba. Day by day, the unicellular simple organism attained complex forms by gradual changes in structure and ultimately gave rise to the most complex type of animal- the man. But it took much longer period and had to pass through the complicated ways. The process, by which the simple and homogenous organism gradually became complex and heterogeneous, is known as organic evolution (Birdsell, 1972; Jaiswal, 2013).

In order to have a general idea about the evolution of various forms of life; we should turn to the geologists and the palaeontologists. The geologists and the palaeontologists are really helpful in obtaining the past and the characteristic fossilized remains found on earth. The different layers of the earth have been arranged chronologically with their characteristic fossil remains of plants and animals. The earliest layers contain no traces of life, and this is why they are known as Azoic or lifeless layer.

Some prefer to call these as Archaeozoic on the ground that the first form of life was too minute and soft to leave any traces of their existences on the layers of the earth.

The quaternary epoch of the Cenozoic era is remarkable by the emergence and development of man, who is the subject matter of our study. Formerly, man was regarded as the special creation of God, and it was thought that he had no relation with other animals. But at the beginning of the 19th century the development of a few branches of sciences, e.g. zoology, palaeontology, Comparative Anatomy, Geology, etc., helped a few energetic persons to come forward demanding man’s closer relationship with other animals. As early as the 18th century and earlier, bone remains of various extinct animals and ‘dressed’ flints had been discovered by some scientists. On those facts, they tried to establish the great antiquity of man. The declaration of the scientists, no doubt, caused a great controversy (Birdsell, 1972; Jaiswal, 2013).

But when Boucher de Perthes, a French Custom Official, discovered in the year 1846, a few dressed stone artifacts from the ancient gravels of Somme near Abbeville, the controversy regarding the antiquity of man spread throughout the length and breadth of the country. Most of the scientists of those days opposed vehemently Boucher de Perthes’ claim regarding the antiquity of man. In 1954, Dr. Rigollot of Amiens after discovering a few Abbevillian types of artifacts from the sand-pits at St. Acheul strongly supported Boucher de Perthes. Then, in the year 1859, a group of distinguished British scientists examined the facts critically on the site and acknowledged the claim of Boucher de Perthes. The year 1859 will be remarkable forever in the history of human being due to the publication of an epoch-making book ‘The Origin of Species’ by Charles Darwin (Bernard, 1994).

From the results of his painstaking research, Darwin established the doctrine of evolution. According to him, man is a result of evolution from lower animals. Then, in the year 1871, he wrote ‘The Descent of Man’, in which he came to the conclusion that ‘a member of the anthropomorphous sub-group gave birth to man’. The results of Darwin’s research were whole- heartedly supported by Huxley in England and Haeckel in Germany. The views of these eminent scientists brought a revolution in the line of thinking of those days regarding the origin of man. The discovery of certain fossils such as Neanderthal man in 1856, Pithecanthropus in 1891, and Australopithecus in 1925 gave many evidences in favor of the evolutionary significance (Brauer and Smith, 1992).

Man did not acquire his present characters suddenly but through a longer process of evolution; that is why, the earlier types of man exhibit many differences as compared to the modern man. During the quaternary periods numerous modifications took places in the human phylum, which developed into various lines, one of which gave rise to man. The emergence of man from the non-human stock by a process of evolution has been approved by all concerned. The outstanding features of the early quaternary, i.e. Pleistocene is the Great Ice Age.

Due to certain geographical reasons the climate of the earth suddenly began to change and became colder and colder until all the water transformed into ice. According to the eminent glacialist of Europe, Penck and Bruckner, the Alps witnessed four major glacial periods, which they named after the four Alpine rivers, Gunj, Mindel, Riss and Wurm. Between these glacial periods there were inter- glacial periods of warmth. These glacial changes were also accompanied by great periods of mountain building. All these factors jointly did much in washing out the old forms of life and evolving into new and better types (Brauer and Smith, 1992).

Our present state of knowledge is still unable to tell with cer ainty the exact place of human origin. The claim of South Central Asia is no doubt greater than any other places regarding the cradle of mankind. The sudden upheaval of the Himalayas during the Middle and Upper Miocene brought about a change in the flora and fauna of that area. The tropical forest of the northern side of the newly formed Himalayas gradually disappeared, which favored the evolution of ground-dwelling type. The specialization of man occurred in the northern region. But the claim of Africa regarding the origin of man had been established by Darwin who said that ‘it is somewhat more probable that our early progenitors lived in the African continent than elsewhere’ (Bernard, 1994).

In recent years the discoveries made by Dr. and Mrs. Leakey in Africa supported the view put forward by Darwin. The discoveries relating to various australopithecines in Africa starting from the late fifties of the earlier century have exposed many new dimensions of evolutionary thinking relating to hominids. The international Expedition conducted in afar region of N.E. Ethiopia, Africa, between 1973 and 1977 put discernible light on the question of origin of hominids in this continent. However, the process of evolution, though it may be true, was not restricted to a single continent (Bernard, 1994; Brauer and Smith, 1992).

From the above discussion it is seen that the subject matter of physical anthropology is really vast and complex. But, at the same time, it is interesting for all concerned, as it tells the story of man- a unique and unparallel creation of the nature from the date of his origin upto the present day. A major problem of physical anthropology then is the early types of man and his nearest relatives among the apes and monkeys. The study of the physical features, blood types and behaviour patterns of these apes and monkeys is necessary to understand the development of these factors in man. The physical anthropologist also tries to trace a particular structural feature from the earliest population. While searching out the nature of trait he should try to know its appearance in man and how it became widespread and, if it disappeared, the reason behind it.

4. Human Diversities

After studying the origin, development, and the place of evolution of man, a physical anthropologist should focus his attention towards the different varieties of man present in the various parts of the earth. All the living varieties of modern man belong to the species-Homo sapiens. The men of today, though they differ in certain cases outwardly, are all quite similar to one another in basic characteristics. It is seen that the men found during the prehistoric period differ greatly from the modern ones. If anybody goes to the very earlier periods he will find no human forms. This fact has already been pointed out in the previous lines. Owing to this reason it has been remarked that Homo sapiens of today have emerged from earlier non-human forms (Bilsborough and Wood, 1986; Jaiswal, 2013).

The way by which man developed from his non-human ancestors and also the process of change that is still going on in his bodily parts is the subject matter of physical anthropology. It is generally seen that one group of people exhibits certain common hereditary features, which differ in various ways from  the other groups. The Homo sapiens of the world can be divided into a number of such groups known as Race. The race itself is a problem and its study requires much knowledge and care. In physical anthropology the scientific study of the different aspects of race- its origin, types, migration, inter- mixture, racial physiology and psychology is a complicated, interesting and thought- provoking matter.

The study of man will be incomplete if anybody neglects the importance of environment on man’s various workings. In studying physical anthropology we should know how the environment has affected and continues to affect the structural features of man. In studying the diversity of human forms, a physical anthropologist gives much stress on the environmental factors. The various physical features, which are the criteria for racial classification, are dependent on the environmental conditions. These are the main lines of study of the physical anthropologist (Bilsborough and Wood, 1986; Jaiswal, 2013).

Physical anthropology should not be confused with human biology, anatomy and physiology. Physical anthropology in no circumstances studies man as a standard being as is done by anatomy and physiology. Physical anthropology tries to find out the differences on the basis of physical traits. With the help of these traits a physical anthropologist distinguishes individuals within the species. Therefore, anthropology is regarded as the science of the group. Human biology, anatomy and physiology study the structure and function of the contemporary man whereas physical anthropology deals with the man mainly from the racial and chronological viewpoints (Buettner-Janusch, 1969).

Formerly, a large number of anthropological investigations were completely anatomical as physical anthropology stood as an independent branch of knowledge when human anatomy was at its infancy. The anatomists try to generalize their observations whereas the essential duty of the physical anthropologists should be to point out the differential trait and also to analyze the causes of such differences.

5. New Physical Anthropology

The focus of attention of the physical anthropologists of today is being changed. In the former days the physical anthropology has been considered primarily as technique. The primary objective was to measure certain external forms by means of instruments and to observe and compare these among the various groups of people. The old physical anthropology was nothing but a technique. The different body measurements and classifications were the primary aim of those days and it continued for many years without any effective changes, the reflection of which can be seen in the later period when the scientists engaged themselves mainly in body measurements in the study of evolution and race (Fleagle, 1988; Jaiswal, 2013).

The methodology in physical anthropology has now been changed. The descriptive stage is now over and the analytical stage has begun. These two stages have been designated as classical physical anthropology and new physical anthropology by Washburn. He has emphasized that though these two stages look at the things somewhat differently, yet there are no sharp limits dividing the two. The classical physical anthropology was interested in classification and not in the interpretation. For example, while studying the nose, the classical anthropologist used to take series of measurements of the nose which was regarded as an independent entity. On the basis of the measurements they attempted to classify the noses into the various groups. But it has now been seen that the nose is an integral part of the face and, therefore, there are many difficulties in studying it as a separate entity.  The form of the nose is dependent on various factors (Fleagle, 1988; Jaiswal, 2013).

Benninghoff and Seipel are of opinion that the facial is greatly influenced by the stresses of mystification. According to Baker, the force of the development of teeth increases the size of the bones of the neighboring region. The classical physical anthropology did not give stress to these inter-relating factors. Here lies the difference with the new physical anthropology. The classification of the different forms, use features like the Somatic and Osteological features which are in most cases complex in nature and which cannot be explained by the measurement stick alone. Washburn has stated that generally, the lower jaw is considered to be a separate unit and it can be put in metric values. But actually it is seen that the different part of the lower jaw present complex features and each part develops independently in relation to the facial regions. Therefore it should be understood prior to the evaluation of the jaw bone is made. So the new physical anthropology advocates for the adoption of new methodology to understand the things in their proper perspective (Denton, 1985).

6. Biological Anthropology- A New Concept

During recent period the impact of genetical theory into the domain of physical anthropology has brought forth a revolutionary change in the line of thinking. In addition to measurements, observations and necessary analysis of human bones and different bodily parts, the modern physical anthropology has entered into the categorical study of various physiological perspectives through biochemical and genetical viewpoints and less stress has now been given on the linear measurements. The new physical anthropology is not interested in restricting itself in the study of the superficial bodily parts, rather through the adaption of new methodology it pledges to explore the mysteries of various internal features of human biology (Ayala et, al, 1980; Jaiswal, 2013).

In order to study human diversities the new physical anthropology relies extensively on population genetics which offers the physical anthropologists a clearly formulated and experimentally verified conceptual theme. The human races are now best considered as Mendelian populations which are centered round a purely genetic concept. Because of this integrated biology-oriented approach of the present day physical anthropology it is thought desirable to call it biological anthropology.

By virtue of its new concept the scope of biological anthropology has very naturally been expanded and integrated. It promises to study human evolution and differentiation in the background of biological variations in primates. While studying the nature and extent of fossil men and living men attempts are made to explain aboutthe various process and products of evolution such as anatomy, serology and behaviour in respect of natural selection in association with genetics and environmental effects and cultural adaptation. It also pledges to reconstruct the past events of human being and to analyze and project current trends (Kimura, 1983).

The criteria for racial discrimination, that we are still using, are nothing but superficial characters. In recent time the attention of the physical anthropologists has been diverted and looked at the less obvious but intrinsically more important differences such as blood types, differences in musculature, etc. and also they have started to study the group differences of sexual maturation, growth rates and various disease immunities. Naturally, these factors are more reliable because of the facts that these three are based on genotypical features. Also these have got some practical importance and the results may be used in various ways. On the other hand, the factors like head length, nose form, etc., on considering all these it may be concluded that the outlook of the physical anthropologists of today has been changed to a remarkable extent (Kimura, 1983).

7. Applied Physical Anthropology

Let us now discuss about the applied aspect of the physical anthropology. The principal aim of all sciences is to apply the results of scientific investigations in the service of mankind. This applied concept in physical anthropology is not a new introduction. The results of investigations of physical anthropology have been harnessed for getting practical benefit in various fields. The techniques of anthropometry are greatly utilized in the field known as “human engineering”- a term used by the experimental psychologists and applied engineers doing work on biochemical problems. In anthropological sense human engineering indicates the efforts to design and build modern machines which would fit persons working with these. The contributions of physical anthropology, especially in western countries, are numerous (Mellars, 1990; Jaiswal, 2013).

In the field of medicine and dentistry, pediatrics, orthopedics, orthodontics and prosthetics, etc., the data of physical anthropology have been and are being utilized considerably. The physicians very often feel the need of anthropometry in their profession. The gynecologists should have an idea about the dimension of the pelvis of the expectant mother and the approximate size/position of the head of the baby in the womb. It is essential for the surgeon to have an actual idea about the measurement of the bones at the time of diagnosing the presence of a bone lesion. Anthropometry has got a special role play in sports medicine also. The actual idea about the different dimension of the body, increase in muscular volume, etc., can be obtained only by measuring the body scientifically. The use of this branch of science in finding the solution for many medico-legal problems is immense.

The physical anthropologists have tried to utilize their results of study in understanding the different disease resistances to temperature, humidity, etc., which are optimum for them. The recent advancement in the study of human problematic situations and the physical anthropologists has been able to come forward to examine their data in the light of modern genetics. The results of their study have potentially important applications. The studies of dermatoglyphics in physical anthropology have contributed many substantial facts which have been utilized in human welfare.

Besides these general applications of physical anthropology there are many specific applications which deserve mention in this connection. A number of studies have been conducted by the scholars who reflected the usefulness of physical anthropology in diverse fields of human life. The studies concerning the human body in relation to the physical surroundings like Hooton’s study for seating accommodation in trains and the anthropometric study of men and women conducted by the Bureau of Homo Economics in America in order to improve the clothing size, may be regarded as remarkable contribution in this field (Mellars and Stringer 1989). During recent time much emphasis is being laid to design the seats and thereby making the sitting arrangements more comfortable. It has been understood that a close correlation exists between health and good posture. If a seat creates trouble in keeping the body in a good posture, it results in various disabilities in skeletal, muscular and other organic parts of the body.

On the other hand the correctness in sitting posture enhances alertness and endurance as well as improvement in circulation and respiration of the persons concerned. Body measurements in working position can thus improve the design of seats in offices, educational institutions, in public vehicles, etc. Therefore the designers of these sitting arrangements are required to have a knowledge regarding various anthropometrical perspectives. Modern furniture designers in many countries utilize the results of anthropometrical studies to plan their activities in a scientific way (Jaiswal, 2013).

In the army the data of anthropological investigations are extensively used in the Western countries. The anthropometric surveys on the military personnels are considered essential to get their body measurements done which are used to meet various demands. In Mexico, the National Military Academy has been doing effective work in this line since 1951. Here the results of biometric investigations are extensively used in the selection of cadets. The anthropometric data are greatly used in military research and development.

The Air Forces very often utilize the anthropometric data in solving spatial problems in aircraft and also in improving flight clothing. Anthropometry is used to design the cockpit according to body size, gun-turrets, and seats for the passenger aircraft, designing of tank and gun-sight, pressure suits and helmets, anti-gravitational suits and so on. The quartermaster Corps takes the help of anthropometry for making better fitted and efficient clothing. They emphasize on finding out the relationship between clothing sizes and body measurements so that the clothes may fit a good number of the military personnels with minimum or no alteration. It can then be easily said that measurements of the body are extensively used to meet the various requirements to solve practical problems.

Physical anthropology has now included the dynamic and the functional measurements in addition to the static measurements of man and, naturally, its importance has been increased considerably. The symposium on the Applied Physical Anthropology which was held at the United States National Museum, Washington, under the auspices of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, in the year 1948, opened a new vista in the world of physical anthropology like the identification of the unknown who died during the war, medico-legal aspects of the skeletal materials, measurements of man for making machinery, anthropometry and apparel design, military anthropometry in Great Britain, in the Air Forces, and in the Quartermaster Corps (Mellars, 1990; Jaiswal, 2013).

The data of physical anthropology are used in the correct interpretation of facts in the subjects like history and sociology. The research findings of physical anthropologists are extensively used in the exploration of physical phenomena especially in prehistory and ancient history where written documents are either missing or are insufficient to reach at a definite conclusion. The doctrine of racial superiority and inferiority in the history of the different countries, that was very much prevalent to fulfill different political and economic motives, has proved absurd by the analytical study of the physical anthropologists today. The possession of false ideas in the field of human races has, in many respects, led the historians and the politicians arrived to the wrong conclusions which have created tension and even bloodshed. The new classical sociologists also have understood the importance of physical anthropology in their study and research (Young, et.al, 1981). They are keen to find out the anthropological cause influencing the socio-economic condition of the human groups. Malinowski, a renowned Sociologist, is of the opinion that individual physiology is always seen modified by social and cultural determinism. It is seen that all the organizations relating to social survey or investigations have given importance to physical anthropology in order to collaborate with the other fields like the engineers, orthodontists, bio-physicists, environmental physiologists, etc., which is the need of the present time as it will help in solving many basic problems in a novel way. The applied physical anthropology, the scope of which is varied, thus fulfils a useful function in the society of mankind.

8. Scope of Bio-Physical Anthropology

Most anthropologists carry out research and teach about what they have learned. They are employed  by universities, colleges, museums, NGOs, etc. However, a third of all anthropologists use this knowledge and methodology of problem solving for practical purposes in corporations, government agencies, non-governmental organizations, medical institutions, and other non-academic  settings. They are applied anthropologists. It is likely that there will be continued growth in the number of these non-academic jobs (Jaiswal, 2013).

Some applied cultural anthropologists work as researchers, administrators, implementers, or mediators in major corporations. They help the companies understand and deal more efficiently with employees and customers from diverse cultures and subcultures.  There have even been anthropologists working  in the White House and U.S. Congress studying the overall operations and personal interactions. In recent years, some cultural anthropologists have worked for the U.S. military and NATO in Afghanistan to help them better understand the cultural realities of the people of that region. A few cultural anthropologists have been hired by Native American tribes and other indigenous groups to  help them with community development and to advise them in their interactions with the  outside world.

References

• Andrews, R, and Stringer C.1989, Human Evolution, An Illustrated Guide, London, British Museum.
• Andrews, P., 1986. Fossil evidence on human origins and dispersal. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia of quantitative Biology 51 : 419 – 428.
• Ayala, Francisco I. and John A. Kigar, Jr. 1980. Modern Genetics. The Banjamin/Cummings Publishing Company Inc.
• Bodmer, W.F., and Cavalli Sforza, L.L, 1976. Genetics, Evolution, and Man; San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Company Publishers,
• Birdsell, J.B. 1972, Human Evolution, Heinemann Educational Books, London.
• Beard, K.C., M.F. Teaford and A. Walker, 1986. New Wrist bones of Proconsul africanus and P. nyanzae from Rusinga Island, Kenya. Folia Primatol. 47: 97-118.
• Bernard Wood, 1994. The oldest hominid yet. Nature 371 :280 – 281.
• Bilsborough, A. and B.A.Wood’, 1986. The Nature, Origin and Fate of Homo erectus. In : Major Topics m Primate and Human Evolution. Eds. B. Wood, L. Martin and P. Andrew 295 – 316. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Brauer, G. and F.S. Smith, (eds). 1992. Continuity or Replacement: Controversies in Homosapiens Evolution. Balkema, Rotterdam.
• Buettner-Janusch, J.1969, Origins of Man : Physical Anthropology. Wiley Eastern Pvt. Ltd.,New Delhi.
• Campbell, B, 1964.Quantitative Taxonomy And Human Evolution. In : Classification and Human Evolution, S.L. Washburn (Ed.) Methuen and Co. Ltd., London.
• Clochon, R.L. and Corruccini, R.S. (ed.), 1983. New Interpretations of Ape and Human Ancestry; New-York, Plenum.
• Fleagle, J.G. 1988- Primate Adaptation and Evolution, San Diego; Academic Press.
• Kimura, M., 1983. The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Jaiswal, A, 2013. Human Genetics and Applied Biophysical Anthropology: A Comprehensive Treatment of Biophysical Anthropology, Heritage Publishers, New Delhi, India.
• Mellars, P., 1990. The Emergence of modern human. Cornel! University Press. Ithaca,N.Y.
• Mellars, P. and C.B. Stringer (eds.) 1989. The Human Revolutions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New.
• Young, J.Z., E.M. Jope and K.P. Oakley, 1981. The Emergence of Man. The Royal Society and British Academy, London.
• Andrews, P., 1984. On the characters that define Homo erectus. Cour. Forsch. Inst. Senckenberg 69 : 167 – 175.
• Bruce, E.J. and F.J. Ayala, 1978. Humans and apes are genetically very similar. Nature, Lond. 276 : 264 – 265.
• Craig Stanford, 2013, Biological Anthropology, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall publication.
• Jaiswal, A, 2013. Glossary of Biophysical Anthropology Terms: A Comprehensive Treatment of Biophysical Anthropology, Heritage Publishers, New Delhi, India.
• Jaiswal, A, 2013. Human Origin and Variation: A Comprehensive Treatment of Biophysical Anthropology, Heritage Publishers, New Delhi, India.
• Jurmain, R, et al, 2013, Introduction to Physical Anthropology, Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning