Abstract

This paper will try to present an evolutionary linkage to the current circumstances and will attempt to attend some of the questions which whoever is presuming to be “sapience” should ask itself:

How it came to be that a certain primate is jeopardizing its own population existence and the survival of its lineage by investing significant portion of its metabolic energy and cognitive function in destructive or counterproductive behavioral activities on the account of its own well being and on the expense of natural habitats to the extent of facing imminent annihilation of the biosphere on which it depends for its survival on the only planet where it exist.

How it came to be that an animal is focusing all of its evolutionary strategies on specific methodologies and technics meant for dominating and indoctrinating other specimens of its population to collectively share the same ambitions centered around two main premises: the exploitation of other living creatures and the disregard of the living conditions of others in a shared habitat and to achieve such absolute domination by all means of violence and aggression over other biological specimens and over populations of specimens identical to them.

How it came to be that specimens of the human primates are voluntary participating and performing such individualistic and collectively coordinated behaviors which supporting, maintaining developing and advancing the annihilation of other human primate specimens as well as all other life forms sharing their habitat.

Is a socially engineered culturally incentivized rewording system can explain such behavioral expression? What is the perceptual and cognitive engine which motivates the enthusiastic participation of specimens in such counterproductive functioning on personal level which drive them for partaking in coordinated participation in such activities as collectives in local communal and entire population scales .

How it came to be that the majority of the specimens of the blue plant's primates are either conforming to perform or are voluntarily preforming such daily behavioral activities which include sets of predefined tasks fanatically executed which intended to directly (e.g. logging, drilling rigs, building, refining fuels, commercially farming etc.) or consequently (e.g. squire property, buying cars, consuming etc.) contributing to an escalation in the pace and magnitude of the destruction of their habitat’s biological systems, the declining in the fitness of others of their kind and the distortion of planetary ecologic and abiotic conditions which supporting their own life and the life of their progeny.

How it came to be that almost all human primate’s specimens comply with biased cultural narratives and social ordering which are based on certain ideological principals which promotes societal elevation of individual specimens and collectives of specimens according to their contribution (proportional, significance or relative) for the domination efforts of the top classes, subsequently contributing to the destruction of their biosphere and the annihilation of their kind, doe's the human primates incentives to comply and partake in activities of destructive nature are its ambitions to achieve or obtain upgraded hierarchical position regardless of the consequences, and the fact that individual's status will be correlated to the levels of systematic damage their ideological theories, methodologies or actions inflicts or can potentially inflict on the natural systems, by either participating, designing, developing or enhancing means or methods of mass destruction (i.e. production) and the higher is the magnitude (i.e. yield) of their contribution for the destruction (i.e. resource acquisition) and disruption of life and ecosystems (i.e. resources), and the higher they stand in the Parthenon of glorified demigods and contributes the higher they negatively  impacted their environment.

How it came to be that most human primates embrace and subordinate to such ideologies (i.e. worshipers and followers) originated in well recognizable higher classes consist of individual human primates who are developing and spreading nomenclature narratives that glorify the utilization of means of mass destruction that can further the exploitation and accelerate the depletion of their planet finite natural resources and to advance the killing and domination of other specimens identical to them.

Is the condition is a result of denial of observations or inability to perceive the reality of things:

  • Can the human primate specimens perceive empirical reality?
  • Can it understand causality and compute logic expressions containing wide array of dynamic interactions?
  • Can it process complex causation of occurrences and follow the thread of processes and identify trends in order to predict the points of conversion threatening it or it progeny, and if it can will it denial the resulting conclusions if subsequently he is the factor holding the responsibility for such occurrences?

Or is the human condition is a result of an inability to attend, perceive or process external occurrences:

  • Maybe the human primate specimens do not possess the cognitive properties that would render its brain sophisticated enough to process a collection of long term trends in order to compute logical near terms predictions?
  • Maybe there is no denial of reality rather a lack of cognitive abilities for processing multiple layers of data with multiple data sets in each?
  • Is it beyond the cognitive abilities of the human primate to process and connect multiple linear process of observed occurrences that signaling a future destruction of its environment?
  • Can the human primate brain perceive the exponential nature of linear processes and their tipping points in order to compute the resulting consequences of such process of occurrences to the future existence of its progeny and itself?

Maybe there are other forces in work that shaped the human cognitive perception and function and by exploring them one can form a better understanding of how things came to be rather than why things are the way they are.

There are two observable trends enforcing each other which are in effect directly responsible for the current manifestation of the predicament of near future annihilation of the human primate’s lineage and maybe even their plant biosphere:

Population overshoot and population consumption over-reach

And there is only one reason for it:

The dominating mindset inhabits the skulls of the majority of the population of the human primate, the animal that is currently dominating the landscape of the lithosphere of the blue planet

Understanding how our cognition was shaped is the key for understanding the human condition

We are a temporary biological being with a computation system existing in a temporary oasis of equilibrium in the midst of chaotic processes on the grandest scale of all – the scale of the entire universe that constantly manufacturing and destroying matter and systems of matter releasing unperceivable magnitudes of energy and vice versa, mater and energy act and interact with each other over periodic process observed as stages defining spaces and perceived relativity, causing changes in elemental structure on scales large enough to create environmental specifications that can produce the organization of matter into life via trends of processes that includes periods of transition, development and stable stages which defining the concept of time in temporary computation systems inhabit the biological tissue of a conscious being horrified by the insignificant of its non-equilibrium short living existence.

We are the result of long processes producing simple single systems evolving into multiple systems with increasing complexity in incremental steps of matter created by energy and collapsing back into energy exploding again into new forms of matter producing nuclear fusion and fission conditions manufacturing and changing elements and defining spaces according to conditional laws governing processes of physical transformation of elements and matter to planets of which some can obtain environments and conditions for chemical formation of biochemical and biological structures made from the same matter that can be found anywhere in the universe, the matter that construct all living creatures which are subjected to the same forces of destructive chaotic elements and deteriorating energy that circumstantially can be constructive for the emergence and for the temporarily maintenance of life.

We temporarily exist as living being the product of a lineage of certain blueprint organizing matter into a specific variation of a biological designs, we are grounded by a force we called gravity to a surface of a rounded pile of elements organized in different structure and surface formations in physical states abstracted into a single nomenclature object with commonly recognized symbol labeled as “planet” (in general) and “planet earth” in particular:  One planet out of ~1024 (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) planets in the universe, a planet in which a collusion of past conditions and circumstances enabled the emergence of carbon based biological life and on which more recent development created a biosphere enabling the maintaining of a certain planetary and atmospheric conditions which support a continuum for carbon based life.

We exist on a planet with a biosphere that was maintained long enough for enabling living systems to emerge and to evolve for generations, for chemical reactions to form structures and to integrate into different modules of chemical and electrical reactors molded into a system of biological life. Our planet biosphere maintained long enough for supporting the evolution of life form utilizing biological code to preserve a blueprint for manufacturing the structural design and functional operating system of living being and for easily replicate biological matter producing a continuum of replications and mutations changing every generation subsequently creating specimens more capable of surviving that can be observed as evolving and adapting over generations with growing code lines for each accidental improvement in the structural or functional design over its predecessors, an aftermath learning system evolved utilizing “experimental” reproduction mechanism mixing two strains of code into one, which causes generational changes due to random mutations and errors in replication and over generations adjusting or failing the survivability of a linage of a certain strain of code and consequently improving or deteriorating the fitness of each generation over the previous ones until it achieve a temporary equilibrium of existence or parish.

We as a collective of individual animals got to this point at time and space as a result of multiple processes evolving over large geological periods, our story didn’t started 200,000 years ago with the emergence of the modern features in our lineage but billions of years ago with the creation of a universe made of atomic particles governed by forces and laws which are currently defined in our collective knowledge database as disciplines of theoretical physics, thermodynamics and chemistry, our story and the journey of life on earth started with subatomic partials constricting atomic elements defining spaces by presuming energetic equilibrium  in a stable state which we define as mass and matter emerged from a universe of chaotic energy attempted to be described by the discipline of quantum mechanics.

Life is a system of unconscious organization of matter in biological system of certain function and purpose evolved and exist under the governing laws of chemical reactions organized in organelles and organs of biological mechanisms operated by a central information system choreographing and synchronizing biomechanical functions, utilizing the properties and tendencies of natural chemical to acquire, produce and use metabolic energy for supporting such functions, constructing and reconstructing physical designs with evolving features and intensifying information system all based on code of data containing all the genetic specification for building, maintaining and operating biological system. The specification code of a certain strain of genetic data changes through steps of reproduction and mutations continuously adjusting the biological structure and the genetic blueprint creating new lineages of which success can be only measured in multi-generational retrospection (i.e. number of generations, population size and distribution, fitness of population etc.) and in many cases after the lineage is already extinct. The achievement of a continuum of a long-term existence of lineage is the result of its certain strains of genetic data, its evolutionary state is measured by the level in which the development of its genetic code contributed to the maximization of individuals fitness subsequently leading to its generational survivability for the maximum possible length of  a continuum of the supporting environmental conditions that are relative to the maximum continuation of life itself on the planet (e.g. a shark lineage is more successful than the primate lineage in term of overall generational existence on the planet).

In order to achieve understanding of the world one needs to be able to capture and conceptualize in its mind an accurate representation of the occurrences happening outside of its mind, to achieve that one need to established strong foundations for an empirical perceptual framework convening all the main principals of the different systems of nature that facilitating the formation and governing the dynamics that produce and predict natural phenomena’s.

The human primate experience the external occurrences through a prism of consciousness that is determine by its cognitive specifications: in order for understanding how nature works one first need to understand how the cognitive systems that interfaces with the external universe works and for that one need to understand how it was evolved. Today we have all the data to understand the human primate cognitive conciseness and to place it in the larger context of the grand scheme of things, we can follow the thread of our cognitive evolution from the beginning of our ancestry lineage until today but certain conditions are preventing it from happen.The cognition of human primates is the product of evolutionary processes of adaptation to different environments and overcoming certain shortcoming arising from environmental conditions and societal arrangements, the evolutionary stockpiling of code in DNA includes the chronological logs for each adaptation for new living arrangement which signify the correlating conditions (which imply the causation) that shaped the human primate cognition during each stage of evolution.

We have sufficient data for tracking the changes and charting the stages of cognitive properties and expressions at each cognitive milestone in the apparatus of historical conditions; we can follow the thread of our cognitive evolution in our ancestry lineage from the first cell until today, but from some reason this is not the case and the current statuesque regarding the cognitive evolution and states is missing data that is crucial for doing so.

Cognition and social organization

I watched the ants when I was a kid: I saw a line of ants coming out from one hole, they all had the same coloration and body modules but they differ in sizes and proportions, they all walked together in crowded paths breaking into smaller groups following narrowing lanes until they reached a place where resources such as grains were presented, and then they picked up the resource and started returning back all the way using the same pathways until they return to their nest and disappeared inside the hole, and when a group of ants coming from one hole cross a path with individuals of another group coming from a different hole they killed each other, and some ants were raiding other ants colony stealing their gathered resources or using other ants as their food resource, then I looked at the structures and paths that makes our neighborhoods and looked at my parents, at the people in other places on the television and at everybody around me walking the same paths, living in similar arrangements and behaving in similar ways to an insect.

As a kid I wondered what makes the ants do what they do, what made them what they are and how they are integrated into the surfaces and object around them such as trees that at that time were abstract objects to me as I only knew their name and could visualize their appearance but I didn’t know a thing about them, but as I tied the relations between organisms and the roles that type of objects interacting with other type of objects plays in the formation and function of organisms and their habitat, I learned that the ants need the seeds and the grain made by the trees, bushes and grass and that plants needs the ants to pollinates, spread and plant their seeds and they are all part of a system of relationships and by themselves outside of such system, they have no ability to survive, and the birds and the rats and the snakes and the earthworms and all of the rest of living creatures are dependent on each other for maintaining their existence.

I observed the present forms and designs of the different living creatures and their interactions with other living creatures and with their environment and I learned from other documented scientific observations about the gradual rise of such living organisms from the elemental structures of their habitat, how their design morphed over long processes of adaptation evolving  from the small isolated natural mechanisms of chemical and energetic systems arising from chaotic interactions of sub-particles, particles and forces and circumstantial occurrences that by chance and perseverance over eons organized into biochemical and biomechanical modules making the biological unit of cells joining other cells into symbiosis organs operating as one by centralized command system, evolving into complex entities of which some exhibit motility incorporating more or less complexity in their functionality and biological designs that produce more or less sophisticated sets of motile behaviors intended for sustaining their existence and fulfilling their reproductive purposes.

Human primates like ants can have different appearances (phenotypic expressions) but their exhibit behaviors are similar whatever hole or colony they are originated from, ants lifestyle and social structure is governed by rudimentary system of neurological tissue (ants whole nervous system contain ~250,000 neurons) producing an instinctual reactionary system of motility mechanized and mobilized the ant by triggering certain type of behaviors corresponding to certain type of stimuli, in the ants case the organizer of the colony was the consolidation of nomenclature based operating system that unified specific responses to a catalog of classified stimuli triggers that produce identical behaviors in individuals that organically organizes multiple number of individuals in a cooperative units in which each ant performing identical or complementary  functions synchronizing them and focusing them on activity of specific nature at a time (forging, defending, nursing etc.). The ant organization is driven by an operating system based on basal neurological and endocrinal mechanisms incorporating an ideological methodology that is built around obedience to a nomenclature of deterministic triggers (symbols) that produce compliance in individuals to execute motile decisions that will be considered as irrational behaviors from individualistic stand point but when examined in the context of the bigger picture these behaviors proven to be very rational for achieving the type of evolutionary success as ants did.

Like ants the human primates coming out from a hole and crowding in the same paths leading to a locations where they perform their daily tasks that are related to resources acquisition for personal use, which they bring back and gather in their personal chamber in their colony’s nest (city).

The human primates seems to function in the same way as ants although the human primate’s brain is glorified as the most sophisticated of all other organisms (the human primate brain and nerve system contains  from 10 billion to over 100 billion neurons and the average number of neocortical neurons is ~19 billion in female and ~23 billion in male).

But unlike the ants that are collectively and logically utilizing the gathered resources to benefit the group, the most exhibit phenomena in the human primate’s behavior is the inequality in the distribution of the resources in the group and the unbeneficial outcomes that this kind of behavior imposed on the group: In ant colony resources are distributed in accordance to hierarchies that are based on prioritization of the utilization of resources for the more urgent or important functions that supports the survivability of the colony’s reproduction core and progeny (eggs, larva and pupas) and in which the energetic needs and the safety of individuals of more important purpose or functions are being prioritized accordingly, and one of the most observed behavior in ants is the protection and prioritization of the energetic needs of the reproductive females and the progeny, in the human primates’ colonies the distribution of resources and the portion that is available for individuals differ not according to their functional virtues and skills or their reproductive virtues (phenotypic expressions which are the indicators of the quality of their genetic assets), but according to a class that they are ascribed to, and individuals of different classes have access to different portions of the collectively gathered resources as well as to different quarters and chambers in their colony’s nests .

Human primates and ants using similar methods of communal effort for resource acquisition and protection that although utilizes the same methods, are being facilitated by different approaches:
In ants consumption quotas are prioritize by function and per need to benefit the colony while in human primates consumption is unequal and quotas are not prioritize by the function nor by the needs of individuals but by an entitlement provisions assigned to classes of individuals, the distribution of resources in human primates’ colonies benefit few individuals at the top of the hierarchy on the accounts of all others and does not benefiting the progeny and long-term survivability of the lineage.

The strategy driving the organization of the more rudimentary biological system referred to as ants serving the objectives involved in the daily tasks of maintaining the present, short-term and midterm survivability of their colony’s genetics in order to achieve the goal of ensuring the survivability of their linage in the future, and these short terms objectives which supports the long-term goal is successfully executed for over 100 million years by an entity producing complicated motile behaviors utilizing basal operating system based on a instinctual mechanism’s responding to certain inputs and producing certain outputs in which the outputs are triggered by inputs of certain origin intercepted by sensory modules attended for collecting certain types of data from external sources of natural or cultural origin.

The ants utilizes a simple neuroendocrine (compare to more advanced animals) system that interact with external stimuli in order to react to external occurrences, it rely on electrical and chemical reaction arising from sensors and receptors capturing external signals such as certain molecules, photons, mechanic pressure of objects, pressure waves, surface vibration etc. the ant neuroendocrine system constantly monitoring changes in external and internal signals to recognize and identify the presence of other organisms, resources and abiotic phenomena’s which signaling a certain class of interaction (food, enemy, friend, task order etc.) with external agents it also monitoring  the urgency and the severity of the signal in terms of the ETA of an encounter and the level of the positive or negative outcome it will produce.

The interception of recognizable signals initiating a certain stimuli that activates a certain mechanism producing a certain mode (mood) of operation generated by chemicals (endocrine signaling) that secrete directly into the circulatory system producing biochemical processes that initiates and support prolonged reactionary responses and behaviors, for example the identification of ants from another colony will not produce one bite and then back to foraging but a longer term aggressive mode incorporating a library of aggressive behaviors and tactics.  
The ants’ basal system of functions utilizes a nomenclature library of behaviors organized in department of rudimentary modes of operation (e.g. foraging, nursing, defending/attacking etc.) when a mode is triggered by a stimulus it will activate the corresponding department that will initiate sequences of motile behaviors from a fixed arsenal of behaviors that are associated with each mode of operation. The nomenclature system bundling together under distinctive departments of modes an array of motile functions that are sequenced into complex sets of tactical behaviors.  The bundling of input stimuli and its corresponding output functions into one category of mode (i.e. symbol) optimizing the motoric performances by automating the responses resulting in shorter reaction time and more efficient operation of complicated tasks, it’s also produces persistent behaviors that are easily assembled by a collection of short sequences of behaviors, but more importantly the utilization of categorical nomenclature symbols is the accessory for synchronizing and orchestrating the performance of complicated tactics of cooperation by unifying and equalizing the operating modes in a collective of individuals.

Ants from a low cast needs to perform multiple types of tasks that are activated by multiple types of triggers it needs to accommodate large number of catalogs containing multiple libraries of variations of motile sequences correlated to multiple categories of behaviors that are associated with certain classes of modes.
Ant from a low cast (workers) need to perform multiple types of tasks and to attend multiple number of triggers associated with modes and behaviors of operation and cooperation, the catalogs of modes and behaviors in a low cast ant holds many social related triggers, modes and behaviors which producing larger database of nomenclature symbols demanding larger neurological storage space than a solitary insect as it mostly attend to environmental triggers ant its tasks are performed according to individualistic urgencies (somewhat free will..) without social ordering, the more diverse the tasks triggered by the social ordering the larger the nomenclature matrix will be due to the biological method of storing hierarchal reactionary mechanisms for motile sequencing of trigger based behaviors corresponding to different modes of operations of individualistic and social nature, it produces nomenclature catalogs made of duplication of data in paralleling directories dealing with same functions but in different modes of operations for personal interests and for the collective.

The ant have extended brain tissue dedicated for social related behaviors called the “mushroom bodies” which is the part of the ants brain responsible for the most sophisticated computations occurring in the insect brain it makes 50% of the worker ant brain (compare with 20% in the bee) the mushroom bodies are more developed in social insects and are associated with social behaviors, the mushroom bodies are also involved in learning and it include a mechanism for transferring data from short-term memory (STM) into long-term memory (LTM).

The nomenclature communication mechanism of ants utilizes unified perception and interpretation of the shared experiences, their modes and behaviors are triggered in the same way by same external occurrences and internal needs but the exchange of symbolic triggers with other individuals of their colony suppress other triggers and stimuli and produces identical common modes of operation and behaviors and focuses them as one unit on certain task. Their nomenclature based communication system utilizes sensory receptors and transmitters to exchange information for triggering or irritating a certain instinctual reactions at certain level and for certain period of time and ultimately producing unified behaviors that synchronizing multiple individuals for performing the same function and for mobilizing them as a collective operating as one unit.

We can observe two main operating modes in individual ants: the first is a mode of collective sentiment tuned to attend their colony needs and the second is a mode of self-sentiment to attend the occurrences in the external environment which affect them individually, in ants the mode of self-sentiment is suppressed by the mode of the collective sentiment and their individualistic behavior can be described by some as altruistic. The altruistic like behavior in ants is not a function of cognitive assessment but an instinctual act of functional activity ordering that is triggered into existence by a collective sentiment arise from collective metastability state that is ambivalent to individuals metastability outcome, we can say that individual ants wants to live but are unwillingly driven to sacrifice its wellbeing or to die for the greater cause.

But altruistic like behaviors in ants is mostly the virtue of the non-reproductive casts, the reproductive females are the direct beneficiaries from the altruistic like behavior of the non-reproductive casts and their behavior can be described by some as selfish.

The ants’ nomenclature system of communication and operation benefits the colony, the function of individual worker ants was adapted to produce an “altruistic” functionality that supports the collective tasks that composes their fitness strategy that effectually serves the survivability of their colony and their lineage, the ants type of operating system is the mechanism that produces their system of organization in which the individual is a function in a bigger system which in the short-term benefits others in its colony according to their importance and in the long-term serves the purpose of the survivability of the colony.

The operating mechanism of the individual ants incorporates a nomenclature based communication system that produces a shared culture; the ants’ mindset and not its brain capacity is the force that shapes the organization of the ants in complex colonies and it is the property that produces the observable behaviors of obedience to collective sentiment and order and for synchronizing cooperation.

Human primates’ and ants’ colonies are very similar in their appearance, function and structure but is that mean that the mindset that is the driving force of the individualistic and collective strategies of the human primates is similar to the one shaping the ant’s colonies?

Ant colonies and human primate colonies founded on similar premises producing very similar strategies that are driven by two extremes of cognitive capacities, functionality and complexity: both colonies produce a similar organization that is based on classes of function which supporting a collective corporation for the purpose of resources acquisition and utilization, and for the protection of the colony but the outcomes of such collective cooperation efforts in terms of resources distribution and utilization and the wellbeing and survivability of individuals and colonies are very different.

The colony strategy evolved in insects as a consequence of high number of casualties as a result of high volume and constant predatory attacks from entities of the same virtues (i.e. cognitive and physical properties). One of the main conditions that drove the organization of ants in colonies was that the biggest threat to the ants was other ants.

Insects such as the ants organized in colonies prior to developing more unique armories and weapons in a response to predation from other animals of higher virtues, insectivores belong to higher phylum will focus on larger concentration of insects mass to maximize it energetic return on energetic investment of energy and not on solitary insects, the distribution of individuals over large areas can work better against predation from larger insectivores. The colony evolved as a response to intraspecies competition and predation and the leading fitness strategy started as a method for supporting and protecting the progeny by not leaving them alone, which ignited a reproduction arm race for increasing the ranks to achieve numbers advantage when defending the progeny and when attacking other nests, the reproduction process was maximized for producing high replenishment rates broods for compensating the deficit of casualties and for increasing the number of the ranks with each generation to protect and support larger batches of progeny, the evolutionary arm race between colonies happened at a period of time when fewer types and numbers of insectivores roamed the earth and fewer variations of insects existed in the ancient landscape it was long before grains and many other more modern food sources exists and the resources where limited, scares and distributed over larger areas and as a result insects of the same species fiercely competed and cannibalized each other.

The pitfalls of the human primate cognition

One of the miseries of life is that everybody names things a little bit wrong and so it makes everything a little harder to understand in the world than it would be if it were named differently (Richard Feynman)

Information is the perceived data on which one can build an internal image of the external world

There are two methods to obtain information in the brain of an individual human primate:

  • Acquire information: Register in brain tissue data about occurrences which arise from own personal experience or observation.
  • Inquire information: Register in brain tissue data about occurrences broadcasted by a third party arises from its personal experience or observation.

There are two different methods for sharing experiences and observation between members of the human primate’s collective:

  • Literal communication of experience or observation: By impersonating another person experience in real situations (i.e. participation in shared activity e.g. throwing a spear at an animal), mimicking demonstration of experience by another person (i.e. training e.g. throwing a spear at a tree trunk representing an animal), suggestive or figurative gestures and simulation of experience (i.e. observing theatrical representation of an activity e.g. one primate representing the hunter chasing another representing an animal), graphic illustration of instructive data on visible medium (e.g. a drawing of primates shooting spears at an animal)
  • Abstract communication of data via nomenclature symbols: By receiving input of theoretical data from a third party via abstraction of cognitive ideas in the form of auditory symbols (i.e. spoken words) or visual transcribed symbols on visible medium (i.e. written words).

Today most of the human primates receiving information about the external occurrences via abstracted nomenclature communication from a third party database of conceptualized ideas that are based on experience of observation and indoctrination which represents a fundamental flaw in the validity of the database and the sources arises from the methods in which information is being obtained and shared.

Before one can determine if the knowledge it possess have a true value in representing the real properties of the occurrences in the external natural world one should ask few philosophical questions:

  • Is it matter what someone say or does if what was said or done was based on false premises due to systematic limitations in ones abilities for perceiving and processing data causing erroneous registration of data in one’s brain not because of a lack or unavailability of data but due to one’s inabilities for attending such data and for producing logical inquiries and accurate registration of observations arising  from pathological functionality (or malfunctioning) of its brain computation system?
  • What are the factors which validate or null someone’s output data in the form of its behavioral actions or the theoretical declaration of behavioral actions (in the form of verbalizing, demonstrating or inscribing nomenclature’s symbolic communication and memes) which are ultimately an expression of one’s brain computation processes and their resulting conclusions are a prove of their cognitive build?
  • Can one discuss external occurrences with arguments based on empirical data with another who is unable to process such data?
  • Can one discuss external occurrences with another who cannot perceive or who denial the existence of such occurrences who is unable to perceive and compute multiple factors of occurrences?

All of these declarations have to be examined in an empirical method and with a holistic scientific approach by examining the principles of such differences in individuals’ brain capacities in data input, processing and output in what claimed to be by many as identical computation systems which are sharing the same environment but for some reason experiencing and perceiving the external occurrences in very different ways.

The differences in the computation systems of brain of different functions can be defined as a “mindset”.

To approach such topic one should consider a new methodology that will be used for examine the differences between mindsets in a bias-free environment rather than reexamine it again in its current cultural paradigm, and to disregarding the current commonly accepted set of tools for analysis which were inherited and approved for use by cult-determined disciplines utilizing measuring and analysis tools which are the derivatives of deterministic monolithic ideologies. The measurement of any processes of biological system and its evolution, including the analysis of our mindset should be examine in a cultural-free and ideology sterile environment utilizing only biological processes and procedures in the context of the driving physical and chemical factors and abiotic conditions which determine ecological states and trends, and place in this context organisms’ intraspecies organization and interspecies relationships with other organisms in their communities which are sharing their habitat relative to their previous generations states and the historical states of their ecosystems.
In order to determine the states and trends in the development of a mindset, it must be factored in a matrix of data that includes timeline of historic evolutionary states and environmental trends in which we can factor the energetic exchange between the inhabitants of ecosystems of habitats at every step of development.

Ideology is dealing with the philosophical question of “why things are the way they are?” after determining what are these things, while a scientific methodology “investigating how things came to be” to understand how they work:

Few premises are needed to be established when developing holistic framework intended for examining behavioral output of individuals and populations:

First premise is to clear from the conversation cultural and ideological definitions and terms and not using quantifying and classifications methods that are culturally and ideologically determined and not using methods of classifications of properties and behaviors that are intended for differentiating populations and populous. Most of the current systems of classification are infected by ideology and agenda that were established for the purpose of gaining and maintaining hierarchical order and for facilitating the domination of one group over another and acknowledge that all the current disciplines are relative and relevant for the current system of organization of the human primate. We must ignore the currently accepted method of taxonomic classifications as they are all based on biased ideologies and false methodologies such as the definition of the human primates as a species and not as a sister group to the lineage, differentiating human primates by certain common variations of physical phenotypic expressions and calling it races and not breeds, the classification of populations and populous of human primates as cultural groups according to the exhibits of certain behavioral properties  We must ignore all ideological disciplines and their corresponding classification systems that are built around predetermine definitions of behavioral outputs and phenotypic properties which are based on ranking of societal virtues and norms implemented in compliance to authoritarian agenda.

The second premise is to define an accepted set of nomenclature codes for a scientific framework and to define an absolute nomenclator terminology that will be used in such framework and may or may not disagree with current disciplinary and common lingual interpretations and definitions of such terms, that will include defining and redefining current lingual symbols of quantities and measurement as well as methods of calculus.

The third premise is to form a guideline of accepted scientific methodologies established on sets of empirical categories, factors, laws and rules for a non-disciplinary dataflow matrix correlating to the flow of energy in systems.

Complex abstraction of reality via nomenclature

The system of complex abstraction of reality via nomenclature was created and maintained for the purpose of controlled and enforced disciplinary classification of the members of the general primate population in manageable groups.The main factor driving the inevitable decimation the human primate is not the current system of organization defined as “civilization” but the cognitive system which formed such organization and its weapon of mass destruction: the complex system of lingual abstraction utilizing a nomenclature utilizing a matrix of symbols representing ideological dogmas meant to trigger collective behaviors in individuals of the population that are intended to advance individuals ambitions of domination over other individuals of their own kind. The core problem of the human primate is the abstract nature of semantic definitions and inflated system of provisional interpretations and translation of terms, unlike math, language has mostly failed in defining factual realities and occurrences as a consequence of its abstract nature which was intentionally designed and developing and is tenaciously maintained and protected. Abstract linguistic definitions are shifting dialogs from constructive dealing with scientific inquirers meant to deal with existential issues and to answer general curiosity about occurrences in the natural world which may or may not be affecting our experiences, into time-consuming and exhausting discussions about the semantics and interrelationships of words, phrases, and sentences which render obsolete the arguments that are used in such discussions.

Abstraction of symbols (i.e. words) and strings of symbols (i.e. sentences) are causing disagreement for the interpretations of the meaning of symbols which constructing the strings that form the lingual statements that are used in arguments about existential dilemmas. Such abstraction is degrading the abilities of the portion of the population of human primates from recognizing and for dealing with real existential issues which are jeopardizing the continuation of the entire human primate linage and other life form sharing their ecologic community.

How to achieve common literature and methodology for studying the external occurrences

To achieve common empirical nomenclature one needs first to define a framework of nomenclature (i.e. a system of names or terms) that is based on absolution of terminology and expressions in which one can use to analyze the data in arguments in a way that will distinguish empirical analysis from ideological reasoning in order to enable the separation of rational thinking and that incorporates logical arguments from argument based on commonly accepted ideas that are originated or influenced by deterministic ideologies which transform technical dialog into ideology-contradicting and supporting exchange triggering emotionally driven conflicts of Pavlovian whim.
Utilizing an unbiased nomenclature as a framework can capture the true relationship between specific events and objects of interest to describe the dynamic causality of systems so in order to predict plausible consequences of empirical interactions.

First element for achieving a commonly accepted and undisputed dictionary of nomenclature will be to use only legit terminology with absolute definition of the words that are used to describe empirical events. The second element is the logical qualifications of the contributors to the scientific database in order to have productive discussions and productive resolutions. The third element is an empirical validation for the information that will be considerate in the discussion to determine the coherence of the data presented via scientific analysis.
But the common human primate brain does not function in a way that support empirical based dialogs.

Empirical understanding of the dynamics of natural systems is the only thinking tool for stripping the abstract fog from the nomenclature complexity which associates names and memes to objects and functions not in accordance to their properties, behaviors or functions, but as an abstract symbol that have little or nothing to do at all with the object or phenomena they are representing.

The nomenclature of civilizations today are made of immense dictionary of terms that are mostly based on irrelevant words and terms originated or evolved from a languages that were commonly used in the past (Latin, ancient Greek etc.) which only few can understand today other names are made by the geographic location of the discovery or existence of an object or phenomena, minuscule dialect from remote geographical area where an object or phenomena exists and many more. But especially disturbing to me is the use of science as ideological discipline for classifying individual’s conformity levels and societal utilization ranking implemented in the common practice in the scientific world for associating a certain natural object or phenomena with the name of specific individual that happened to be the one that pointed it out.

The abstracts naming system of empirical terminologies associated with certain disciplines created two cognitive entities: The first is an abstract symbol and the other is an actual object or a phenomena which enabling the distortion of meanings by disassociating of symbols of an object or phenomena from their true properties that divorcing the symbol name from a real meaning and re-associating it with ideological ides for serving the purpose of the implemented system of social order, the symbols and their meaning are controlled by the current narratives of social norms of behaviors that are ordered from the top of the hierarchy, serving the implementation of complicity to dominance by higher classes of individuals over lower classes and is the driving force which creating the nomenclature complexity nightmare where terms are elastic and can represent many meanings and symbols.
There are many ways to name things but the abstract naming of natural phenomena’s is maliciously destructive for the ability of individuals with cognitive potential for system thinking to build inside their heads a model that representing empirically the world outside their heads.

The complexity of disciplinary languages reorganizing the classes in system of segregation and increases the efficiency of the domination of upper classes, the corresponding nomenclature increases the segregation between individuals by creating classes of different meanings for the data communicated between individuals and the knowledge about the external world is becoming more and more uncertain and unclear.
Lingual uniformity is necessary for productive communication between individuals especially when it’s the only mean for assessing others intentions in a species with strong natural tendency to not trust each other. Symbols and meanings can be intentionally or mistakenly associated with other symbols or other abstract names of a symbol creating confusion in the population about the meanings of things; escalating disputes, mistrust and conflicts due to misinterpretations of the intentions of others.

The confusion in interpreting the intentions behind the communicated words by implementing and enforcing the correct use of communication standards was done on purpose and implemented over centuries by the ones that at that time occupied the top of the pyramid of the classes who defined the nomenclature at each era and made languages and lingo's the tools of gaining power and dominance. The manipulation of the communication standards is executed by a methodology that narrativized the association of symbols with another meaning to trigger emotional reaction that can mobilize groups of individual of the same class of utilization, and by swindle the truth from the masses they can implement an ideological agenda deriving from an enforced compliance of the collective to “commonly accepted truth” which enable them to utilize masses of individuals for their sole interests.

The fallacy that is shaping the phenotypic mindset and the common social moods is the result of the utilization of nomenclature system that is facilitated on abstract symbols that represent ideas correlated to emotional triggers and not to the essence of the things and which is constantly being euphemized further into the abstract, one can notice that the focus of most human primates is on memorizing symbols without knowing what are the function and properties of the objects and phenomena’s they are supposed to represent, this type knowledge acquisition demands from the trainee to read specific literature or to attend indoctrinating sessions with authorized indoctrination agent/officer transferring to them the real or the alleged data in the context of the social order ideologies and in accordance to the trainee designated class. As the trainee is advancing in its indoctrination sessions they are demanded to memorize more and more symbols of unique jargon's which demands further learning and memorizing of increasing amount of symbols with decreasing amount of details about them.

The most intriguing observation is of those human primates holding authoritarian certificates of references from the most complicit indoctrination institutes of which their opinions are embraced and endorsed by the top classes which knighted them as “experts” of certain disciplinary ideology or methodology, those glorified geniuses and experts are clearly exhibiting a fundamental inabilities to identify observe or understand and ultimately, to communicate information about the true nature of occurrences outside their heads, and when facing them with such information they fail miserably to form logical arguments utilizing their learned means of thinking and communication and their complex nomenclature of abstract symbols representing abstract ideas that they memorized, their arguments tend to branch by associations, referenced by analogies, emphasized by disciplinary meanings and adjusted to authoritarian nuances, this rich jargon's and mythological storyteller like presentation which for the simple minded human primates who have no such knowledge these knights seems as intelligent and their opinions are accepted as empirical facts.

In today’s societal system the laws of classifications, categorization and grouping of symbols into disciplines and ideologies are based on a biased perception of, living creatures as objects and non-living objects and spaces as property and territories, nothing in the biosphere of the blue planet is measured by the value of the role it plays in the biological existence of the planet ecosystems, but by a societal related classification method quantifying perceived values and cons in the utilization and interactions measured according to a subjective relation to us personally and in relation to our social organization. The social nomenclature bounding the human primate perception to the contexts of its civilization and vice versa, it is founded on implementation of abstract symbols that are intended to support the complicity of the population to instinctive obedience to orders from higher casts facilitated in dogmatic narratives unifying the nomenclature and the corresponding functions and behaviors in groups molding them into classes that are triggered as a collective and are mobilized for performing labor that serves the dominance interest of the ones controlling the civil systems of the human primates colonies.

Societal confusion

The primate known as “human” reached an evolutionary threshold: it regressed into a more rudimentary animal which convey a mindset that is more comparable in behavioral methodologies expression to ants, bees and wasps then to a an entity with a superior cognitive capacity that producing thoughts and actions in a methodology incorporating logical analysis of empirical properties producing trends and context for occurrences.

The regularities of the human primate’s daily activities are corresponded to its short and long-term societal arrangements within its group and like ants human primates are functioning as a colony of casts, the daily regularities performed by the human primate intended to support its existential necessities all intended for maintaining a continuum of short term metastability and survivability which include nutrition, dealing with personal safety by obtaining access to structures sheltering them from abiotic conditions and threats from other human primates, and most important they need to obtain a status for gaining accessibility to the breeding “scene”, all the daily necessities are ultimately supposed to be serving the prospect for achieving genetic continuousness.

The daily regularities of individual human primates are predetermined by the social order it was born into which include the societal laws, regulations and their enforcement, the state of its colony and the trend in relation to environmental conditions, availability and distribution of resources, various intergroup and intragroup circumstances, the type of cast system dominating its culture and its designated roles, gender, phenotypic expression of appearance and many other factors.

The lifestyle of individual human primate that includes the cast and the type of its day to day tasks and functions, are determined by a carefully crafted instruction manual that list sets of definite behavioral tendencies and circumstantial phenotypic properties and their corresponding opportunities of cast and functions potential.

The societal instruction manual is classifying and segregating individuals in classes of social utilization with corresponding entitlements, privileges, rules for engagement with other individuals and groups of same or different classes, restrictions on utilization, consumption and possession of natural resources that are in the colony’s territory which includes access to land and travel through land, restrictions on access and utilization of shelters and protected spaces, restrictions on self-sustaining activities, restrictions on sexual selection and access to breeding partners and many more with increasingly growing nuances of restrictions which regulating the human primates living conditions, lifestyle and well being.

Human primate have a societal face value that is measured by a scale of virtues and vices considering the usability and viability of individuals in classes of utilization in the context of the agenda which driving the societal organization and the order of its colony.

Individual's day to day regularities acts on long term opportunities which are determine by an entitlement scale that is based on face value defining the quotas of access to necessities and luxuries and the restrictions on such access it is produced by factoring into a matrix the sets of skills, virtues, heritage, indoctrination compliance level and other phenotypic expression of traits which compute a spectrum of potential classes and societal arrangements that are available and attainable by such individual.

In today's societal arrangements the members of the human primates are measured by very different sets of virtues and vices than when human primates lived in smaller family groups of up to 200 individuals made of kin and close relatives and the set of skills each individual sustained must have being inclusive for performing multifunctional tasks in variety of day to day activities (hunting, making tools and devices, building shelter, foraging etc.) with differences in tasks and performance were based on physiological capabilities and biological roles in accordance to gender and life histories stage.

Human primate individuals during long periods of their latest evolution, especially after they learned the use of fire, have relied on adaption for a certain mindset emphasizing a comprehensive multifunctional capacity where each individual devised the ability to perform every possible daily task, accomplished in accordance to urgency and necessity. At certain point in time the evolution of the human primate reached a state of equilibrium and peaked in terms of individual capabilities and intellectual properties which drove the development of cultural database that included technologies for utilization of fire, individualistic tools and tactics that rendered each human primate as a “Swiss army knife” that for some degrees could enable adults or small families to survive by themselves in nature.
(From wiki): “The control of fire by human primates was a turning point in the cultural aspect of human primate evolution. Fire provided a source of warmth, protection, and a method for cooking food which allowed geographic dispersal, cultural innovations, and changes to diet and behavior. Additionally, creating fire allowed the expansion of human primate activity to proceed into the dark and colder hours of the night.

Claims for the earliest definitive evidence of control of fire by a member of Homo range from 0.2 to 1.7 Mya), evidence for the controlled use of fire by Homo erectus, beginning some 600,000 years ago, has wide scholarly support. Evidence of widespread control of fire by anatomically modern human primate’s dates to approximately 125,000 years ago.”

But at certain point human primate’s societies started to organized in very large colonies and a process of evolutionary adaptation for casts and hierarchical compliance made a comeback, the large colony organized individuals and communities in trophic casts incorporated around a department of specific sets of tasks that were based on exclusiveness and specialization in narrow range of functional activities such as casts of farmers, mercenaries or shelter builders in lower casts and niche’s tasks of administration and exploitation of the lower casts by the higher casts. In a larger group the value of the individual is measured by the perceived effort and not by results as the surplus in larger groups is much higher which reducing the amount of energy and time investment required by each individual. The consequence of living in large colonies was the rapid evolution of classes of expedient skills that determined the role of the individuals by their heritage.

The evolution of lineages of individualistic genotypic classes in the human primate societies is determined by the societal ordering, and in the human primate the evolution was driven by classes of compliance and participation in the group order. The organization of animals in groups is the consequences of many factors but the most important are the safety of the individuals and the assurance of their next generation.

Depending on the level of threats for individual adults and for their reproduction process, different strategies of organization can evolve; the evolutionary adaptation will be determined by the level of the threats and the type of genetic assets and phenotypic expression at the time of an emerging threats.

The origin of the human condition

The threat that was driving the evolution of the social order in the human primates was intraspecies aggression by adolescents and adult males of the species toward other males, females and infants. In other mammals the group is organized around interspecies threats arising from aggression and predation by other species while chimpanzees and human primates social organization is based entirely on intraspecies aggression and predation by members of its own species.

The emergence of the gang

The principal ordering chimpanzees into group are defensive and offensive tactics against other members of their species and the methodology of organization is based on the rule of thumb that 2 males are at least twice as stronger than 1 and are more than 50% less likely to be subjected for fatal injuries.
The alliance between two unrelated males signal the rise of the gang and it occurred during the time of our last common ancestor with the chimpanzee and it endured as the force which is shaping the mindset of our lineages, our social organization and the distortion of the sexual selection.
Up to the CHLCA the sexual selection in our lineage was based on fitness virtues arises from phenotypic properties representing individualistic genetic qualities which were later replaced by culturally promoted and enforced norms of symbolic signaling of societal virtue of pretends supported by the tightening of cultural controlled and enforced sexual arrangements that privileges the most efficient deceivers and ruthless aggressors with access to premium females rewording the beta males which managed to join, form or rule the biggest gang around, overwhelming the single alpha males and eliminating their genetic data from the lineage.

All the individualistic virtues of alpha male became null facing the alliance and its defeat was certain against alliance of two beta males even if pound to pound they are inferior to him in their physics and cognition.

Our social organization evolution is established on an alliance between 2 or more males that otherwise would have being fierce rivals.

The alliance between rival males had an evolutionary trade-off with the traditional alpha properties of size, strength and virtues of courage and altruism which were rendered obsolete by the alliance, as the predominant factor in the success of passing genes, and was replaced with the genetics of individuals that have the tendency to conform to an unnatural alliance relaying on the accumulation of the muscle power of multiple individuals compensating for inferior physics or lack of courage.

The formation of the gang started a regression in the traditional individualistic virtues of alpha in the males of the human primate linage which were replaced by traits that benefit the alliance, the beta males have become more successful in passing genes and the most rewording fitness strategy for beta was based on selfish interests that  long term submission for authority of others producing instant safety and facilitating dreams of futuristic dominance, the reword for compliance was instant safety and permission for reproduction. The traditional roles dominating the process of sexual selection in the human primate lineage, that were previously conducted by females choosing a mate by its alpha qualities and virtues has shifted into a male driven sexual permission that is authorized and controlled by the gang which favor the genetics of the conformist betas and as result the previously preferred genetic of the alpha males which built around fearless and gender roles equality in the human primate replaced by the inferior genetics of the fearful beta males acting on their fear rather than on logic producing travesties rooted in societal norms and submitting the females to authoritarian sexual reproduction enforcement. In such social evolution the fertility of the males is decreasing as social traits of non-aggression signal lower levels of testosterone and the exclusive access to fertile females by beta male facilitated by enforcement of restrictions on alpha males via aggressive measures (facilitated by class of mercenaries) preventing alpha males from fertilizing females that under the protection of higher class by facilitating individual exclusivity of male over female.

Fear of others of our own species was the main factor in driving the evolution of the human primate into cast based societies, fear of others of your own kind was also the driver for the development of our particular TOM in the early members of our lineage and the current human condition is the result of long periods of adaptive cognitive strategies meant for dealing with others threatening you and for you threatening others.

The individuals with more fear for their life tend to form alliances more than ones with less fear, they submit for being abuses by their alliance partners and they gang together in order to submit others for their abuse.

Fearing your own kind is in the root of the human condition

It is the rooted fear and distrust of each other that shaped the most common mindset in the population of the human primates and it is the facilitator of the social order which organized our societies in ants like colonies which incubate and amplify the human condition.

Self-awareness in human primates was the result of intraspecies aggression and predation

We have learned to anticipate the thoughts and behaviors of others that are identical to us and by doing so we developed the perception of the self – the self-awareness.
The most formidable enemy is the one that know how you think, the constant fear of an enemy which shares the same cognitive capabilities as you, who know how you think and how you are operating, it knows your strengths and it knows your weaknesses. The intraspecies predation produces the need to outsmart others of equal physicality utilizing cognitive properties to come up with methods to outsmart your enemy which generated constant (obsessive) theoretical simulation of scenarios in our mind for countering the strategies of others of equal properties: this was the predominant factor in the development of TOM in our lineage, it was a result of the constant simulation of every small advantage you can exercise as a leverage in order to survive another day which stimulated an obsessive theoretical planning of strategies countering other's strategies which include running simulation of scenarios and their counteraction and then memorizing them in your head.

Profiling of your enemy and inhabit its avatar in your mind for simulating plausible interactions between it and yourself produced obsessive attention for learning how to deal with others that are just like yourself, it was amplified by the sense of urgency during a period of extreme conditions were the only available energy for consumption was in the mass of others of your kind, the constant fear and anxiety triggered the amygdala which produces the type of  thinking which overtime developed to a sophisticated avatar of the enemy which was constantly presented in the simulation of threats as well as an avatar of yourself for simulating scenarios of encounters, this was the mechanism which developed a self-awareness in our lineage as the enemy which you were obsessed to learn about was you, we developed self-awareness as a result of the duality of the two entities that are antagonistic and identical at the same time, is the structure in two hemispheres of two simulation of the self and its identical alter ego of the other. The perception of the self in human primates is the result of dealing with the constant threat by another being identical to you, it’s the process that created a self-awareness that is different for each genders: the males strategy is to protect themselves against other males while the females relay on males to protect her offspring from other males, both needs to protect themselves from the same enemy - the male.

The belief mechanism in human primates developed earlier to the self-awareness, in a similar way to the belief mechanism exhibit by k-selection animals of inferior trophic classes, in which the threat of predation is part of every present moment.

The belief is a mechanism of automation for triggering the most extreme behaviors as a measure for dealing with extreme vulnerabilities due to inferior physicality, the automation of reactionary behavior for dealing with time sensitive survivability circumstances where a split of a second will determine if you live or die and it is in the base of the famous fight or flight mechanism in which flight will be adopted by animals with inferior physicality and fight will be adopted by animals with superior physicality. During long periods our lineage our physicality was inferior compared to other animals in our environment and compared to the gangs of our own species. The automated response was the surviving strategy in an age when time sensitive decisions for dealing with immediate existential threats from superior enemies, were imminent and could occur at any moment.

The obsession of learning the nuances of others’ behavior and yours counter strategies responses, developed a categorical thinking that was needed in order to classify and memorize the details of the behavior and it corresponding countermeasures, creating the symbolic classification nomenclature utilizing growing number symbols and the consolidation of symbols into methodologies for dealing with the developing strategies of the enemies which demanded larger information storage in brain tissue and longer periods of indoctrination in the discipline of social affairs.

In elephant a similar process of TOM (Theory Of the Mind) started due to the aggression of the males, the elephant large body size enabled them to develop and support large information storage for memorizing large amount of nomenclature nuances for dealing with male aggression and to structure social order to counter the males’ aggression. Perhaps the reason they never developed  self-awareness as we did was the lack of 3D perception that we developed when our ancestors performed parabolic trajectories in high speed utilizing the unique locomotion of ricochetal brachiation in 3D space of movement in the complex environment of the rainforest canopy (Dolphins could grow their brain tissue without the limitation of gravity and with many brain modules accumulated during their 3 evolutionary transitions between perceptual environments (ocean to land and back to ocean) they developed self-awareness as a result from dealing with their enemies which were all physically equal to them such as sharks and other cetaceans)

Memorizing details and utilizing symbolic shortcuts for instinctive responses was the strategy driving the growth in brain tissue in the human primate lineage, and logic had nothing to do with it: it was based on guessing the behavior of others based on theoretical simulations pushing the envelope of plausibility into the extremes and even beyond into the realm of implausibility, it produces a catalog of expected scenarios for which a reaction perceived as appropriate was chosen as a response. Each scenario was triggering a certain state of minds (fear, excitement etc.) and was answered by a certain response picked from a library of learned responses and if the response didn’t achieved it theoretical outcome it went through a process of reasoning to the aftermath and adjustment for a particular state of mind, it was a process of legitimizing an illogical process of thoughts in order to be able to remember them.

The methodology of the cognitive thinking process was focused on recognizing patterns of behavior that triggers emotional state of mind (i.e. fear) in which several variable fine-tune the assessment and computing a response according to metastability variables of positive or negative incomes and outcomes factored in scales of antagonistic variables calculating the levels intensity of the income and outcome ranging from worse to best (e.g. from negative outcomes of death and injuries, energetic exhaustion to a positive effects on the EROEI such as gain of energy and resources or access to female, etc.), urgency scale ranking variables of inevitability of event through levels of probabilities as well as the ETA of an event, the resulting calculation triggered a corresponding set of behaviors with a variety of instinctual reaction in the apparatus of the state of mind.

The process of cognitive automation of behaviors was made by categorizing external events which include interspecies and intraspecies encounters into sets of emotional states of mind corresponding to a scale of perceived intensity which in term triggered a certain reaction from a corresponding to catalogs of memorized responses.
The automation of scenarios based responses demanded categorical organization system of synaptic pathways and larger mass of brain tissue for higher capacity storage space for memorizing fine-tuned sets of responses.

Memories in other animals are organized by a metastability scale which factors in categories the outcomes of experienced events that falls somewhere between the two antagonistic extremes of energetic currencies and physical fitness of positive or negative effects corresponding to several emotional categories ranging from immediate gratification to traumatic displeasure. The metastability categories included responses and actions intended for maintaining life in the short term by avoiding threats and maintaining the supply of energetic material for metabolism and hydration and maintaining the continuation of your genes in the next generation of your lineage by obtaining the opportunity for reproduction and ensuring the survivability of your offspring.

CHAPTER 1: HOW

Holistic approach and Systems’ thinking view of organisms and evolutionary processes

The methodology of Systems’ thinking is of understanding of a system by examining the linkages and interactions between the components that comprise the entirety of that defined system. (Summarized from wiki) A system may be defined in general as a set of interrelated or interacting elements. This definition accommodates both passive structures and active structures. In biology, a living organism is seen as a set of organs, muscles etc. that interact in processes to sustain the organism. Each cell is seen as a collection of organelles that interact in processes to sustain both the cell and the wider organism.

The concept of a system:
  • A system is composed of parts
  • A system is other than the sum of its parts
  • All the parts of a system must be related (directly or indirectly), else there are really two or more distinct systems
  • A system is encapsulated (has a boundary)
  • A system can be nested inside another system
  • A system can overlap with another system
  • A system is bounded in time, but may be intermittently operational
  • A system is bounded in space, though the parts are not necessarily co-located
  • A system receives input from, and sends output into, the wider environment
  • A system consists of processes that transform inputs into outputs
  • A system is autonomous in fulfilling its purpose
  • A system is a dynamic and complex whole, interacting as a structured functional unit circuit.
  • Energy, material and information flow among the different elements that compose a system.
  • A system is a community within an environment.
  • Energy, material, and information flow from and to the surrounding environment via semi-permeable membranes or boundaries that may include negotiable limits.
  • Systems are often composed of entities that seek equilibrium but can exhibit patterns, cycling, oscillation, randomness, or chaos, or exponential behavior.
  • A holistic system is any set (group) of interdependent or temporally interacting parts. Parts are generally systems themselves and composed of other parts, just as systems are generally parts (or “holons”) of other systems.
The systems thinking approach incorporates several tenets:
  • Interdependence of objects and their attributes: independent elements can never constitute a system
  • Goal seeking: systemic interaction must result in some goal or final state
  • Inputs and outputs: in a closed system inputs are determined once and constant; in an open system additional inputs are admitted from the environment
  • Transformation of inputs into outputs: the process by which the goals are obtained
  • Entropy: the amount of disorder or randomness present in any system
  • Regulation: a method of feedback is necessary for the system to operate predictably
  • Hierarchy: complex wholes are made up of smaller subsystems
  • Differentiation: specialized units perform specialized functions
  • Equifinality: alternative ways of attaining the same objectives (convergence)
  • Multifinality: attaining alternative objectives from the same inputs (divergence)

Defining organisms as biological system with behavioral output

Evolution, the effects of time passing, the life histories of systems and their parts, evolutionary systems are dynamic and complex systems with the capacity to evolve over time, examine evolutionary systems requires an interdisciplinary perspectives.

Evolutionary organisms can be defined as biological systems of subsystems:

A species is made of multiple individual organisms genetically similar with compatible reproduction systems – male and female:

Species can be define as a group of individual organisms with compatible reproduction system that make up an interbreeding group and in most cases very similar subsystems, organisms are considered to be in the same species if they can breed procreate and produce fertile offspring.

A species continuation is centered on the organization of males and females in reproduction group:

  • Interspecies: If the interaction is with members of a different species (as in the case of defending from a predator)
  • Intraspecies: If the interaction is with members of the same species (as in the case fighting for the opportunity to breed).
Organs are the biological modules and biomechanics parts which makes the subsystems in an organism system

Organism internal system is made of a collective of organs working together in the execution of a specific body function (biological system or body system). The functions of organ systems often share significant overlap. For instance, the nervous and endocrine system both operate via a shared organ, the hypothalamus. For this reason, the two systems are combined and studied as the neuroendocrine system. The same is true for the musculoskeletal system because of the relationship between the muscular and skeletal systems.

Organ systems and modules:
  • Organs of the digestive system: organs and structures not part of the alimentary canal that aid in digestion; they include the teeth, salivary glands, liver, gallbladder, and pancreas.
  • Organ of Corti: the organ lying against the basilar membrane in the cochlear duct, containing special sensory receptors for hearing, and consisting of neuroepithelial hair cells and several types of supporting cells.
  • Effector organ: a muscle or gland that contracts or secretes, respectively, in direct response to nerve impulses.
  • Enamel organ: a process of epithelium forming a cap over a dental papilla and developing into the enamel.
  • End organ end-organ: a nerve ending in which the terminal nerve filaments are encapsulated.
  • Golgi tendon organ: any of the mechanoreceptors arranged in series with muscle in the tendons of mammalian muscles, being the receptor for stimuli responsible for the lengthening reaction.
  • Reproductive organs female: the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva (external genitalia) of a female. The breasts are a secondary sex character, enclosing the mammary glands.
  • Reproductive organs male: the external genitalia, accessory glands that secrete special fluids, and the accompanying ducts.
  • Sensory organs: organ that receive stimuli that give rise to sensations, i.e. organs that translate certain forms of energy into nerve impulses that are perceived as special sensations.
  • Target organ: organ that is affected by a particular hormone.
  • Vestigial organ: an undeveloped organ that, in the embryo or in some remote ancestor, was well developed and functional.

 

The systems of life are made of two main components

There are two main groups of organisms, Autotrophic organism or autotroph and Heterotrophic organisms or heterotroph (summarized from wiki):

Autotroph or primary producer: is an organism that produces complex organic compounds (such as carbohydrates, fats, and proteins) from simple substances present in its surroundings, generally using energy from light (photosynthesis) or inorganic chemical reactions (chemosynthesis).

Heterotroph (chemoorganoheterotrophs or organotrophs organism) or a consumer: is an organism that cannot manufacture its own food and instead obtains its food and energy by taking in organic substances, usually plant or animal matter. All animals, protozoans, fungi, and most bacteria are heterotrophs.

Autotrophs are fundamental to the food chains of all ecosystems in the world. They take energy from the environment in the form of sunlight or inorganic chemicals and use it to create energy-rich molecules such as carbohydrates. This mechanism is called primary production. Heterotrophs, take in autotrophs as food to carry out functions necessary for their life.

All animals are heterotrophs and they are depending on autotrophs, or primary producers, for the energy and raw materials they need. Heterotrophs obtain energy by breaking down organic molecules (carbohydrates, fats, and proteins) obtained in food. Carnivorous organisms rely on autotrophs indirectly, as the nutrients obtained from their heterotroph prey come from autotrophs they have consumed. Most heterotrophs utilize organic compounds both as a carbon source and an energy source. Heterotrophs function as consumers in food chains: they obtain organic carbon by eating autotrophs or other heterotrophs. They break down complex organic compounds (e.g., carbohydrates, fats, and proteins) produced by autotrophs into simpler compounds (e.g., carbohydrates into glucose, fats into fatty acids and glycerol, and proteins into amino acids). They release energy by oxidizing carbon and hydrogen atoms present in carbohydrates, lipids, and proteins to carbon dioxide and water, respectively.

Most ecosystems are supported by the autotrophic primary production of plants that capture photons initially released by the sun. The process of photosynthesis splits a water molecule (H2O), releasing oxygen (O2) into the atmosphere, and reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) to release the hydrogen atoms that fuel the metabolic process of primary production. Plants convert and store the energy of the photon into the chemical bonds of simple sugars during photosynthesis. These plant sugars are polymerized for storage as long-chain carbohydrates, including other sugars, starch, and cellulose; glucose is also used to make fats and proteins. When autotrophs are eaten by heterotrophs (i.e. consumers) the carbohydrates, fats, and proteins contained in them become energy sources for the heterotrophs. Proteins can be made using nitrates, sulfates, and phosphates in the soil.

Autotrophs and heterotrophs compos the community of living organism and all the system of life

The optimal carrying capacity is the maximum spreading capacity of a biological species in an environment or the maximum population size (mass) of the species that the environment can sustain indefinitely for as long as abiotic and other environmental factors sustain, given the food, habitat, water, and other energetic or habitation necessities maintained.

Organism and their interaction with planetary systems of abiotic factors

Organisms properties are determined by their genetic code which in term determine the way they operate (behave), relative to the way other organisms in their community (all species in shared habitat) are operating, relative to the properties of the abiotic or the non-biological peripheral system of elemental and environmental systems of abiotic conditions and factors. The interaction between organism and abiotic systems are the predominant factor which affects the type and distribution of living organism on the planet. Abiotic systems include the following factors:

  • Temperature: affects metabolism, regulation of body temperature
  • Water and rainfall: affects desiccation of organisms
  • Sunlight: affects photosynthesis and photoperiods of primary producers
  • Rocks and soil, pH, mineral composition, physical structure: affect the distribution and properties of primary produces and consumers
  • Altitude and longitude: affects the atmospheric conditions of oxygen, sunlight radiation and temperature
  • Wind – amplifies temperature effects: increased evaporation: affects plant morphology
Abiotic factors determine ecozones and biome types

Ecozone is a biogeographic division of the Earth's land surface, based on distributional patterns of terrestrial organisms and it characterized by a specific biome or biocommunities (the mix of organisms that coexist in the defined geographic area), there are no sharp boundaries between ecozones, in which a series of biocommunities display a continuous gradient) as they grade into each other.

Evolutionary processes and trends are the outcome of environmental conditions:

The rules of evolution are of a process of a change and bio-diversification where life is gaining ground when water, soil and climate supports a continuous expansion of biomass of the primary producers (plants) and with it, for as long as the supporting conditions maintained the bio-diversifying of consumers species will continue and new species will emerge and will evolve to adapt for specific niches as they are being created in the process until the community of life reaches a stage of a climax community where species evolution is halted in the optimum ecosystem EROEI (Energy Return On Energy Invested) such conditions are presented in the ecozones of the equatorial broadleaf rainforests.

The opposite process is happening when such optimal and regular conditions reversed and are trending in the opposite direction and causing a recession in ecosystems and such as when the precipitation is decreases and the production of biomass by the primary producers decline and as the recession continues the biodiversity of the community of consumers will decline and evolutionary process will start in many species as they are trying to adapt for different conditions in their habitat as they emerge, expands and extinct. When the biodiversity and the biomass of the primary producers is in decline, the consumers will follow in an evolutionary race to the bottom competing on the dwindling resources and habitats and favoring opportunism and rudimentary survival strategies.

An ecosystem can be in three stages:
  • Succession (development) is the expansion of the primary producers distribution, energy production, biomass storage and consumable energetic products (leaves, fruits, flowers etc.) creating a positive EROEI environment for the consumers - More energy is manufactured and captured by the primary producers as they expand their distribution, rang and growth captured as biomass where the community of consumers can evolve to directly and indirectly consume the energy captured in the biomass and the system is in a state positive EROEI and bio-diversification.
  • Equilibrium is a state of optimal production by the primary producers and maximal consumption by the consumers – When optimal conditions are maintained for a long period of time as in the case of the equatorial rainforests, the primary producers reach the maximal capacity of production and storage where the laws of physics and biology are stretched to the maximum. The ecosystem is now in a state of climax community and energy is balanced and maintained within the community in the form of stable biomass of the primary producers with maximum production, distribution and regularity of their products.
  • Recession is a state of contraction of the primary producer’s distribution, energy production, biomass storage and consumable energetic products creating a negative EROEI environment for the consumers - Less energy is manufactured and captured by the primary producers then the current community of consumers’ needs to consume in order to maintain climax community structure.

Evolutionary changes take place over long period of time in multiple generations of sexual selection with accordance to environmental conditions and their trends, in order to track the evolution of species including our own lineage one should factor the environmental conditions and trends and their dynamic interactions with our lineage ancestor’s developmental stage properties in each period of time:

  • Environmental conditional systems: atmospheric/climatic conditions temp, humidity
  • Elemental properties systems: distribution and availability of elements (sun, soil, stone, water etc.)
  • Structural systems: landscape, altitude.
  • Habitat: system of biological and non-biological systems.
  • Ecosystem: all the communities and the abiotic features of the environment
  • Biomes and ecozones: major types of communities often named for the predominant vegetation but also characterized by animals adapted to that environment.
  • Biosphere: that portion of earth inhabited by life and represents the sum of all communities and ecosystems, a closed system and largely self-regulating – the biosphere is the global ecological system integrating all living beings and their relationships, including their interaction with the elements of the planet:
    • Lithosphere: the earth’s crust and the portion of the upper mantle that behaves elastically on time scales of thousands of years or greater. The outermost shell of a rocky planet, the crust, is defined on the basis of its chemistry and mineralogy.
    • Hydrosphere: the combined mass of water found on, under, and above the surface of a planet.
    • Atmosphere: the layer of gases, commonly known as air that surrounds the planet Earth and is retained by Earth's gravity. The atmosphere protects life on Earth by absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation, warming the surface through heat retention (greenhouse effect), and reducing temperature extremes between day and night (the diurnal temperature variations).

Ecological pyramids of energy production, stocking and exchange

Ecological pyramid (also trophic/eltonian/energy pyramid, food web/pyramid etc.): is a graphical representation designed to show the biomass or bio productivity at each trophic level in a given ecosystem.

Biomass: is the amount of stored energy in an ecological system in the living organisms that constructing it, biomass is the total amount of all living or organic matter presented in organisms in each level of the trophic pyramid and the total of all organisms that inhabit a defined area and entire regions of the same ecosystems/ecozone. Biomass pyramids show how much biomass is present in the organisms at each trophic level, while productivity pyramids show the production or turnover in biomass.

Energy pyramids begin with producers on the bottom (such as plants) and proceed through the various trophic levels (such as herbivores that eat plants, then carnivores that eat herbivores, then carnivores that eat those carnivores, and so on). The organisms that hold the highest level of the energetic hierarchies are considered to be at the top of the food chain (which is a term that has no objective value in the holistic view of things).

An energy pyramid of biomass shows the relationship between biomass and trophic level by quantifying the biomass present at each trophic level of an energy community at a particular time. It is a graphical representation of biomass (total amount of living or organic matter in an ecosystem) present in unit area in different tropic levels. Typical units are grams per square meter, or calories per square meter. One problem with biomass pyramids is that they can make a trophic level appear to contain more energy than it actually does. For example, all birds have beaks and skeletons, which despite having mass are not eaten by the next trophic level.

There is also pyramid of numbers which represent the number of organisms in each trophic level. They may be upright (e.g. Grassland ecosystem), inverted (parasitic ecosystem) or dumbbell shaped (forest ecosystem).

Pyramid of productivity and methods for measuring and presenting ecosystems states and properties

An ecological pyramid of productivity’ is often more useful, showing the production or turnover of biomass at each trophic level, instead of showing a single snapshot in time, productivity pyramids show the flow of energy through the food chain. Typical units are grams per square meter per year or calories per square meter per year.

As with the other ecological pyramids, a presentation of the pyramid of productivity in a graph will show the producers at the bottom and higher trophic levels on top.

When an ecosystem is healthy, this graph produces a standard ecological pyramid. This is because in order for the ecosystem to sustain itself, there must be more energy at lower trophic levels than there is at higher trophic levels. This allows organisms on the lower levels to not only to maintain a stable population, but also to transfer energy up the pyramid. The exception to this generalization is when portions of a food web are supported by inputs of resources from outside the local community. In small, forested streams, for example, the volume of higher levels is greater than could be supported by the local primary production. When energy is transferred to the next trophic level, typically only 10% of it is used to build new biomass and becoming stored energy (the rest going to metabolic processes). In this case, in the pyramid of productivity each step will be 10% the size of the previous step (…100,000, 10,000, 1,000, 100, 10, 1, 0.1, 0.01…).

The advantages of the pyramid of productivity as a representation:
  • It takes into account of the rate of production over a period of time.
  • Two species of comparable biomass may have very different life spans. Thus a direct comparison of their total biomasses is misleading, but their productivity is directly comparable.
  • The relative energy chain within an ecosystem can be compared using pyramids of energy; also different ecosystems can be compared.
  • There are no inverted pyramids.
  • The input of solar energy can be added.
The disadvantages of the pyramid of productivity as a representation:
  • The rate of biomass production of an organism is required, which involves measuring growth and reproduction through time.
  • There is still the difficulty of assigning the organisms to a specific trophic level. As well as the organisms in the food chains there is the problem of assigning the decomposers and detritivores to a particular trophic level.
  • Nonetheless, productivity pyramids usually provide more insight into an ecological community when the necessary information is available.

The three basic ways in which organisms get food are as producers, consumers and decomposers.

Producers (autotrophs) are typically plants or algae. Plants and algae do not usually eat other organisms, but pull nutrients from the soil or the ocean and manufacture their own food using photosynthesis. For this reason, they are called primary producers. In this way, it is energy from the sun that usually powers the base of the food chain. An exception occurs in deep-sea hydrothermal ecosystems, where there is no sunlight. Here primary producers manufacture food through a process called chemosynthesis.

Consumers (heterotrophs) are species that cannot manufacture their own food and need to consume other organisms. Animals that eat primary producers (like plants) are called herbivores. Animals that eat other animals are called carnivores, and animals that eat both plant and other animals are called omnivores.

Decomposers (detritivores) break down dead plant and animal material and wastes and release it again as energy and nutrients into the ecosystem for recycling. Decomposers, such as bacteria and fungi (mushrooms), feed on waste and dead matter, converting it into inorganic chemicals that can be recycled as mineral nutrients for plants to use again.

In real world ecosystems, there is more than one food chain for most organisms, since most organisms eat more than one kind of food or are eaten by more than one type of predator. A diagram that sets out the intricate network of intersecting and overlapping food chains for an ecosystem is called its food web. Decomposers are often left off food webs, but if included, they mark the end of a food chain. Thus food chains start with primary producers and end with decay and decomposers. Since decomposers recycle nutrients, leaving them so they can be reused by primary producers, they are sometimes regarded as occupying their own trophic level.

 

States, trends and properties of ecosystem

Equilibrium (climax community)

Climax community, or climatic climax community, is a historic term that expressed a biological community of plants and animals and fungi which, through the process of ecological succession the development of vegetation in an area over time, had reached a steady state. This equilibrium occurs because the climax community is composed of species best adapted to average conditions in that area. A "steady state" is more apparent than real, particularly if long-enough periods of time are taken into consideration.

Non-equilibrium by an Intermediate (transitional) disturbance

In intermediate disturbance, local species diversity is maximized when ecological disturbance is neither too rare nor too frequent. At high levels of disturbance all species are at risk of going extinct. At intermediate levels of disturbance, diversity is thus maximized because species that thrive at both early and late successional stages can coexist.

Low intermediate disturbance leads to decreased diversity while high intermediate disturbance causes an increase in species movement.

Intermediate disturbance levels would be the optimal amount of disorder within an ecosystem. Once K-selected and r-selected species (more about K and r selected species below) can live in the same region, species richness can reach its maximum. The main difference between both types of species is their growth and reproduction rate. These characteristics attribute to the species that thrive in habitats with higher and lower amounts of disturbance. K-selected species generally demonstrate more competitive traits. Their primary investment of resources is directed towards growth, causing them to dominate stable ecosystems over a long period of time; an example of K-selected species the African elephant, which is prone to extinction because of their long generation times and low reproductive rates. In contrast, r-selected species colonize open areas quickly and can dominate landscapes that have been recently cleared by disturbance. Ideal examples of r-selected groups are algae. Based on the contradictory characteristics of both of these examples, areas of occasional disturbance allow both r and K species to benefit by residing in the same area.

A non-equilibrium model is used to describe the relationship between disturbance and species diversity:
  • Ecological disturbances – have major effects on species richness within the area of disturbance
  • Interspecific competition – results from one species driving a competitor to extinction and becoming dominant in the ecosystem
  • Moderate ecological scale disturbances – prevent interspecific competition
Disturbances disrupt stable ecosystems and clear species' habitat

Disturbances in ecosystem lead to species movement into the newly cleared area. Once an area is cleared there is a progressive increase in species richness and competition takes place again. Once disturbance is removed, species richness decreases as competitive exclusion increases.

Succession that begins in new habitats, uninfluenced by pre-existing communities is called primary succession, whereas succession that follows disruption of a pre-existing community is called secondary succession.

The trajectory of successional change can be influenced by many factors such as the site conditions, the character of the events initiating succession (perturbations), the Interactions between the present species and stochastic factors such as availability of colonists or seeds or weather conditions at the time of disturbance. Some of these factors contribute to predictability of succession dynamics; others add more probabilistic elements. It is a phenomenon or process by which an ecological community undergoes more or less orderly and predictable changes following a disturbance or the initial colonization of a new habitat.

Succession may be initiated either by formation of new, unoccupied habitat, such as from a lava flow or a severe landslide, or by some form of disturbance of a community, such as from a fire, severe windthrow or flood.

Successional dynamics beginning with colonization of an area that has not been previously occupied by an ecological community, such as newly exposed rock or sand surfaces, lava flows, newly exposed glacial tills, etc., are referred to as primary succession. The stages of primary succession include pioneer plants (lichens and mosses), grassy stage, smaller shrubs, and trees. Animals begin to return when there is food there for them to eat. When it is a fully functioning ecosystem, it has reached the climax community stage.

Successional dynamics following severe disturbance or removal of a pre-existing community are called secondary succession. Dynamics in secondary succession are strongly influenced by pre-disturbance conditions, including soil development, seed banks, remaining organic matter, and residual living organisms. Because of residual fertility and pre-existing organisms, community change in early stages of secondary succession can be relatively rapid.

Forest succession

The forests, being an ecological system, are subject to the species succession process. There are "opportunistic" or "pioneer" species that produce great quantities of seed that are disseminated by the wind, and therefore can colonize big empty extensions. They are capable of germinating and growing in direct sunlight. Once they have produced a closed canopy, the lack of direct sun radiation at soil makes it difficult for their own seedlings to develop. It is then the opportunity for shade-tolerant species to become established under the protection of the pioneers. When the pioneers die, the shade-tolerant species replace them.

  • Because of their higher reproductive rates and ecological opportunism, primary colonizers typically are r-strategists and they are followed by a succession of increasingly competitive flora and fauna.
  • The ability of an environment to increase energetic content, through photosynthetic capture of solar energy, increases with the increase in complex biodiversity as r species proliferate to reach a peak possible with K strategies.
  • r-strategists gradually being replaced by K-strategists which are more competitive and better adapted to the emerging micro-environmental characteristics of the landscape.
  • Eventually a new equilibrium is approached (a climax community) and biodiversity is now considered maximized at this stage, with introductions of new species resulting in the replacement and local extinction of endemic species.
Succession types – primary, secondary and cyclic

Ecological succession is the observed process of change in the species structure of an ecological community over time. The time scale can be decades (for example, after a wildfire), or even millions of years after a mass extinction. The community begins with relatively few pioneering plants and animals and develops through increasing complexity until it becomes stable or self-perpetuating as a climax community. The ʺengineʺ of succession, the cause of ecosystem change, is the impact of established species upon their own environments. A consequence of living is the sometimes subtle and sometimes overt alteration of one's own environment.

Secondary succession

Secondary succession includes responses to natural disturbances such as fire, flood, and severe winds, and to Seasonal and cyclic dynamics

Cyclic succession

Unlike secondary succession, these types of vegetation change are not dependent on disturbance but are periodic changes arising from fluctuating species interactions or recurring events.

Causes of plant succession

Autogenic succession can be brought by changes in the soil caused by the organisms there. These changes include accumulation of organic matter in litter or humic layer, alteration of soil nutrients, change in pH of soil by plants growing there. The structure of the plants themselves can also alter the community. For example, when larger species like trees mature, they produce shade on to the developing forest floor that tends to exclude light-requiring species. Shade-tolerant species will invade the area.

Allogenic succession

Allogenic succession is caused by external environmental influences of nonliving factors in the environment and not by the vegetation. For example, soil changes due to erosion, leaching or the deposition of silt and clays can alter the nutrient content and water relationships in the ecosystems. Animals also play an important role in allogenic changes as they are pollinators, seed dispersers and herbivores. They can also increase nutrient content of the soil in certain areas, or shift soil about (as termites, ants, and moles do) creating patches in the habitat. This may create regeneration sites that favor certain species.

Trends in ecosystem and community properties during succession

Species diversity almost necessarily increases during early succession as new species arrive, but may decline in later succession as competition eliminates opportunistic species and leads to dominance by locally superior competitors. Net Primary Productivity, biomass, and trophic properties all show variable patterns over succession, depending on the particular system and site.

Ecological pyramids of productivity and biomass: a snapshot in time of an ecological community.

Biomass pyramid shows the amount of biomass at each trophic level while productivity pyramid shows the production or turn-over in biomass at each trophic level.

The bottom of the pyramid represents the primary producers (autotrophs). The primary producers take energy from the environment in the form of sunlight or inorganic chemicals and use it to create energy-rich molecules such as carbohydrates. This mechanism is called primary production. The pyramid then proceeds through the various trophic levels to the apex predators at the top.

When energy is transferred from one trophic level to the next, typically only ten percent is used to build new biomass. The remaining ninety percent goes to metabolic processes or is dissipated as heat. This energy loss means that productivity pyramids are never inverted, and generally limits food chains to about six levels.

Terrestrial biomass generally decreases markedly at each higher trophic level (plants, herbivores, carnivores). Examples of terrestrial producers are grasses, trees and shrubs. These have a much higher biomass than the animals that consume them, such as deer, zebras and insects. The level with the least biomass is the highest predators in the food chain, such as foxes and eagles.

Plants are the primary producers at the bottom of the pyramid after them comes the primary consumers (herbivores) followed by the secondary consumers (predators) followed by tertiary consumers (carnivores) and so on, the biomass pyramid decreases markedly in number of species and individuals of a species at each higher level of the food chain pyramid.

Trophic properties – Trophic level of an organism is the position it occupies in a food chain

A food chain represents a succession of organisms that eat another organism and are, in turn, eaten themselves. The number of steps an organism is from the start of the chain is a measure of its trophic level.

  • Trophic level 1 primary producers: plants and algae
  • Trophic level 2 primary consumers: herbivores eat plants
  • Trophic level 3 secondary consumers: predators eat herbivores
  • Trophic level 4 tertiary consumers: carnivores eat other carnivores
  • Trophic level 5 the top of the food chain: apex predators that have no predators

The path along the chain can form either a one-way flow or a food "web". Ecological communities with higher biodiversity form more complex trophic paths.

The process of primary production by heterotrophic organisms

Primary production is the production of chemical energy in organic compounds by living organisms. The main source of this energy is sunlight but a minute fraction of primary production is driven by lithotrophic organisms using the chemical energy of inorganic molecules.

Regardless of its source, this energy is used to synthesize complex organic molecules from simpler inorganic compounds such as carbon dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O).
In the end point is a polymer of reduced carbohydrate, (CH2O), typically molecules such as glucose or other sugars. These relatively simple molecules may be then used to further synthesize more complicated molecules, including proteins, complex carbohydrates, lipids, and nucleic acids, or be respired to perform work. Consumption of primary producers by heterotrophic organisms, such as animals, then transfers these organic molecules (and the energy stored within them) up the food web, fueling all of the Earth's living systems.

When a plant grows, new organic matter is created by the process of photosynthesis, which converts light energy into energy stored in chemical bonds within plant tissue. This energy fuels the metabolic machinery of the plant. New compounds and structures are synthesized, cells divide, and the plant grows in size over time. A plant requires sunlight, carbon dioxide, water, and nutrients, and through photosynthesis the plant produces reduced carbon compounds and oxygen.

Primary production definition: the synthesis and storage of organic molecules during the growth and reproduction of photosynthetic organisms.

Water is "consumed" in plants by the processes of photosynthesis (see above) and transpiration. The latter process (which is responsible for about 90% of water use) is driven by the evaporation of water from the leaves of plants. Transpiration allows plants to transport water and mineral nutrients from the soil to growth regions, and also cools the plant. Diffusion of water vapors out of a leaf, the force that drives transpiration, is regulated by structures known as stomata. These structures also regulate the diffusion of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere into the leaf, such that decreasing water loss (by partially closing stomata) also decreases carbon dioxide gain. Certain plants use alternative forms of photosynthesis, called Crassulacean acid metabolism (CAM) and C4. These employ physiological and anatomical adaptations to increase water-use efficiency and allow increased primary production to take place under conditions that would normally limit carbon fixation by C3 plants (the majority of plant species).

To calculate primary production we can measure the rate at which photosynthesis occurs as well as the rate in which the individual plant increases in mass when new chemical compounds and new plant tissue are produced. Over time, primary production results in the addition of new plant biomass to the system. Consumers derive their energy from primary producers, either directly (herbivores, some detritivores), or indirectly (predators, other detritivores).

Primary production on land is a function of many factors

Primary production has an upper limit to the amount of energy that can be captured by autotrophs the limits arise from abiotic factors:
Only a small fraction of the sun's radiation is actually used in the photosynthetic reaction in plants at the Earth's surface. Of the total solar radiation striking the Earth's outer atmosphere, about half of it is reflected back to space by ice, snow, oceans, or deserts, or absorbed by gases in the atmosphere such as the ozone gas layer which absorbs nearly all ultraviolet light, which makes up about 9% of the sun's radiation.
The autotrophs primary production limit is determine by multiple factors such as the intensity of solar radiation reaching the earth's surface which depends geographical location defining the angle of the surface to the sun (the maximum energy intensity is received at the equator, and the intensity decreases as we move toward the poles), the altitude (higher intensity in higher altitude and vice-a-versa), atmospheric conditions such as clouds and the amount of humidity and particle in the atmosphere, daily exposure time to radiation (a mountain ridge can shade an area for few hours a day), there are also limits to primary production of biomass that arise due to other factors which involved in the process of photosynthesis such as the local hydrology the availability of water as well temperature, minerals in the ground and many more factors limit the primary production in geographic areas, and these differences have profound effects on observed geographic patterns of biomes in macro and micro climate zones.

Overall, of the light that reaches Earth's surface, only about half of it is in the wavelength range that can be used by plants in photosynthesis (~400-700nm wavelength) - this is called the Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR). Plants strongly absorb light of blue and red wavelengths (hence their green color, the result of reflection of green wavelengths), as well as light in the far infrared region, and they reflect light in the near infrared region. Even if the wavelength is correct, the light energy is not all converted into carbon by photosynthesis. Some of the light misses the leaf chloroplast, where the photosynthetic reactions occur, and much of the energy from light that is converted by photosynthesis to carbon compounds is used up in keeping the plant biochemical "machinery" operating properly - this loss is termed "respiration", although it also includes thermodynamic losses.

Plants do not use all of the light energy theoretically available to them, on average, plant gross primary production on earth is about 5.83 x 106 cal m-2 yr-1. This is about 0.06% of the amount of solar energy falling per square meter on the outer edge of the earth's atmosphere per year (defined as the solar constant and equal to 1.05 x 1010 cal m-2 yr-1). After the costs of respiration, plant net primary production is reduced to 4.95 x 106 cal m-2 yr-1, or about 0.05% of the solar constant: this is the "average" efficiency, and in land plants this value can reach ~2-3% and in aquatic systems this value can reach ~1%. This relatively low efficiency of conversion of solar energy into energy in carbon compounds sets the overall amount of energy available to heterotrophs at all other trophic levels.

Gross primary production and net primary production

Gross primary production (GPP) is the amount of chemical energy as biomass that primary producers create in a given length of time. (GPP is sometimes confused with gross primary productivity, which is the rate at which photosynthesis or chemosynthesis occurs.) Some fraction of this fixed energy is used by primary producers for cellular respiration and maintenance of existing tissues (i.e., "growth respiration" and "maintenance respiration").

The remaining fixed energy (i.e. mass of photosynthate in the form of sugar or other substance made by photosynthesis) is referred to as net primary production (NPP). Net primary production is the rate at which all the plants in an ecosystem produce net useful chemical energy; it is equal to the difference between the rate at which the plants in an ecosystem produce useful chemical energy (GPP) and the rate at which they use some of that energy during respiration. Some net primary production goes toward growth and reproduction of primary producers, while some is consumed by herbivores.

Both gross and net primary production are in units of mass per unit area per unit time interval.

In terrestrial ecosystems, mass of carbon per unit area per year is most often used as the unit of measurement.

Definitions and calculation methods of primary production

Gross Primary Production (GPP): is the total amount of CO2 that is fixed by the plant in photosynthesis. Respiration (R): is the amount of CO2 that is lost from an organism or system from metabolic activity. Respiration can be further divided into components that reflect the source of the CO2:

  • Rp : Respiration by Plants (Autotrophs)
  • Rh : Respiration by Heterotrophs
  • Rd : Respiration by Decomposers (the microbes)
Net Primary Production (NPP):

NEP is the net amount of primary production after the costs of plant respiration are included. Net Primary Production (NPP) = the Gross Primary Production (GPP) minus Respiration (R) or NPP = GPP – R

Net Ecosystem Production (NEP):

NEP is the net amount of primary production after the costs of respiration by plants, heterotrophs, and decomposers are all included. Net Ecosystem Production = the Gross Primary Production (GPP) minus the sum of all types of Respiration (Rp + Rh + Rd) or NEP = GPP - (Rp + Rh + Rd)

These definitions are only for "primary" and not "secondary" production

Secondary production is the gain in biomass or reproduction of heterotrophs and decomposers. The rates of secondary production are very much lower than the rates of primary production.

Measuring Primary Production is conduct by two general approaches:
  • The first one is measuring the rate of photosynthesis
  • The second one is measuring the rate of increase in plant biomass
Rate of Photosynthesis:

The process of photosynthesis utilizes carbon dioxide + water reaction with sunlight to produce glucose + oxygen + water. A balanced chemical equation for the process can be written as 6CO2 + 6H2O —> C6H12O6 + 6O2. Overall, photosynthesis uses light energy to convert carbon dioxide into a carbohydrate.

Theoretically we can measure the depletion of CO2 from plants tissue into the surroundings per unit time (or the generation of O2) to calculate the primary production. When plants exposed to light photosynthesis or primary production occur and in the absence of light photosynthesis or primary production do not accrue in both cases respiration maintained.

Cellular respiration occur throughout the daily cycle (light and darkness) and it is the reverse process from photosynthesis, a balanced chemical equation for the process can be written as C6H12O2 —> 6CO2 + 6H2O

Photosynthesis stores energy and respiration releases it for use in functions such as reproduction and basic maintenance. When calculating the amount of energy that a plant stores as biomass, which is then available to heterotrophs, we must subtract plant respiration costs from the total primary production.

Biomass – the mass of living biological organisms in a given area or ecosystem at a given time.

Biomass can refer to species biomass, which is the mass of one or more species, or to community biomass, which is the mass of all species in the community. It can include microorganisms, plants or animals. The mass can be expressed as the average mass per unit area, or as the total mass in the community.

How biomass is measured depends on why it is being measured. Sometimes, the biomass is regarded as the natural mass of organisms in situ, just as they are. For example, in a salmon fishery, the salmon biomass might be regarded as the total wet weight the salmon would have if they were taken out of the water. In other contexts, biomass can be measured in terms of the dried organic mass, so perhaps only 30% of the actual weight might count, the rest being water. For other purposes, only biological tissues count, and teeth, bones and shells are excluded. In stricter scientific applications, biomass is measured as the mass of organically bound carbon (C) that is present.

Apart from bacteria, the total live biomass on Earth is about 560 billion tones C, and the total annual primary production of biomass is just over 100 billion tones C/yr. However, the total live biomass of bacteria may exceed that of plants and animals. The total amount of DNA base pairs on Earth, as a possible approximation of global biodiversity, is estimated at 5.0 x 1037, and weighs 50 billion tones. In comparison, the total mass of the biosphere has been estimated to be as much as 4 TtC (trillion tons of carbon).

Different methods used for calculating the rate of biomass accumulation:

Calculating biomass dry weight (without the water) of plant material (stems, leaves, roots, flowers and fruits, minus the mass of the seeds that may have blown away) that was accumulated over one year in a defined area is one of the common methods for measuring production of biomass in terrestrial fauna.
The measure of primary production by rate of biomass accumulation is calculated in grams m-2 yr-1

There are specific methods for calculating biomass of certain types of ecosystems such as:
Grasslands biomass calculation methods

Most frequently, peak standing biomass is assumed to measure NPP. In systems with persistent standing litter, live biomass is commonly reported. Measures of peak biomass are more reliable if the system is predominantly annuals. However, perennial measurements could be reliable if there were a synchronous phenology (regularly recurring biological phenomena) driven by a strong seasonal climate. These methods may underestimate ANPP in grasslands by as much as 2 (temperate) to 4 (tropical) fold. Repeated measures of standing live and dead biomass provide more accurate estimates of all grasslands, particularly those with large turnover, rapid decomposition, and interspecific variation in timing of peak biomass. Wetland productivity (marshes and fens) is similarly measured.

Forests biomass calculation methods

Methods used to measure forest productivity are more diverse than those of grasslands. Biomass increment based on stand specific allometry plus litterfall is considered a suitable although incomplete accounting of above-ground net primary production (ANPP). Field measurements used as a proxy for ANPP include annual litterfall, diameter or basal area increment (DBH or BAI), and volume increment.

 

Animals

All animals are heterotrophs: they must ingest other organisms or their products for sustenance. Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms of the kingdom Animalia (also called Metazoa). The animal kingdom emerged as a clade within Apoikozoa as the sister group to the choanoflagellates. Most known animal phyla appeared in the fossil record as marine species during the Cambrian explosion, about 542 million years ago. Animals can be divided broadly into vertebrates and invertebrates:

  • Vertebrates have a backbone or spine (vertebral column): They include fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals and amount to less than five percent of all described animal species.
  • Invertebrates lack a backbone: They include molluscs (clams, oysters, octopuses, squid, snails); arthropods (millipedes, centipedes, insects, spiders, scorpions, crabs, lobsters, shrimp); annelids (earthworms, leeches), nematodes (filarial worms, hookworms), flatworms (tapeworms, liver flukes), cnidarians (jellyfish, sea anemones, corals), ctenophores (comb jellies), and sponges.

The state of an animal species and its evolutionary trend are relative to the states and trends of its ecological community and to the species genotype

There are two fundamental states for a species, for individual organisms and for ecological community’s state of equilibrium and state of non-equilibrium.

The ecosystem’s non-equilibrium states have two options recession or development; accordingly a species or an individual organism can either have as a result a negative or positive short-term or long-term EROEI.

The state of an organism and a species is determine by its energetic stock that is available for output (work) and that is needed to be maintained by a specific energetic input, the dynamic interactions between the abiotic factors and individual organisms and multi-organism systems of energetic stocks are the defining factors of an ecosystem.

The evolution of motile animals

Motility

Motility is the function of an organism to move spontaneously and independently from one point in space to another point in space.
In biology, motility is the ability to move spontaneously and actively for a biological purpose (e.g. for consuming objects of energy (feeding), for copulating (reproduction), to move away (escape) from threats and hazards etc.). Motility is genetically determined and is determine by genotypic assets of motile organs and it is determined by the historic process of adaptation for environmental factors. The term motile applies to unicellular, simple multicellular and complex organisms (animals), as well as to some mechanisms of fluid flow in multicellular organs, in addition to animal locomotion.

Motility evolved in few different stages based on evolving strategies that drove motility for certain behavioral function first based on the fundamental existential domains for living organisms:

  • Maintaining internal structure: to stay alive in the immediate term by avoiding threats of other organisms and environmental hazards.
  • Maintaining energetic balance: to stay alive for the intermediate term by consuming energy via predation of other organisms
  • Maintaining the species: to stay alive in the long term by passing the genetic data via sexual reproduction

The basic 3 domains of our early ancestors only got more complex as the accumulation of genetic data offered more fine-tuned systems for motile operations.

Motility is the result of the development of logic functions of motile behavioral outputs

Definition of function: A function is a mathematical relationship in which the values of a single dependent variable (or a system of variables) are determined by the values of one or more independent variables (or systems of variables). Function means the dependent variable is determined by the independent variable(s).

Motility is a system of functions of a non-equilibrium system of biological matter

Biological systems are physiological systems of living organisms and are made by the organization and manipulation of physical systems of chemical, electrical, mechanical of properties utilizing the governing physical laws. Physical and non-biological systems have only two states:

  • Equilibrium: a state of stability when EROEI is in a constant state of balance
  • Non-equilibrium: a state of instability when EROEI is in a state of equalization from a state of energetic surplus or energetic deficit.
Equilibrium

In thermodynamics equilibrium is relevant for non-living systems; it is an axiomatic concept of thermodynamics of an internal state of a single thermodynamic system (e.g. structure of uniform atoms, molecules etc.), or a relation between several thermodynamic systems connected by more or less permeable or impermeable walls (i.e. organization of different compounds of atoms and molecules crating systems of balanced thermal mechanical, chemical, or radiative exchange).
In thermodynamic equilibrium there are no net macroscopic flows of matter or of energy, either within a system or between systems. In a system in its own state of internal thermodynamic equilibrium, no macroscopic change occurs. Systems in mutual thermodynamic equilibrium are simultaneously in mutual thermal, mechanical, chemical, and radiative equilibria. Systems can be in one kind of mutual equilibrium, though not in others. In thermodynamic equilibrium, all kinds of equilibrium hold at once and indefinitely, until disturbed by a thermodynamic operation. In a macroscopic equilibrium, almost or perfectly exactly balanced microscopic exchanges occur; this is the physical explanation of the notion of macroscopic equilibrium.

A thermodynamic system in its own state of internal thermodynamic equilibrium has a spatially uniform temperature. Its intensive properties, other than temperature, may be driven to spatial inhomogeneity by an unchanging long range force field imposed on it by its surroundings.

In non-equilibrium systems, by contrast, there are net flows of matter or energy. If such changes can be triggered to occur in a system in which they are not already occurring, it is said to be in a metastable equilibrium.

Though it is not a widely named law, it is an axiom of thermodynamics that there exist states of thermodynamic equilibrium. The second law of thermodynamics states that when a body of material starts from an equilibrium state, in which portions of it are held at different states by more or less permeable or impermeable partitions, and a thermodynamic operation removes or makes the partitions more permeable and it is isolated, then it spontaneously reaches its own new state of internal thermodynamic equilibrium, and this is accompanied by an increase in the sum of the entropies of the portions.

One fundamental difference between equilibrium thermodynamics and non-equilibrium thermodynamics lies in the behavior of inhomogeneous systems, which require for their study knowledge of rates of reaction which are not considered in equilibrium thermodynamics of homogeneous systems.

Non-equilibrium systems

Non-equilibrium thermodynamic systems are physical systems that are not in thermodynamic equilibrium but can be described in terms of variables (non-equilibrium state variables) that represent an extrapolation of the variables used to specify the system in thermodynamic equilibrium. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is concerned with transport processes and with the rates of chemical reactions. It relies on what may be thought of as more or less nearness to thermodynamic equilibrium.

Difference between equilibrium and non-equilibrium thermodynamics

A profound difference separates equilibrium from non-equilibrium thermodynamics. Equilibrium thermodynamics ignores the time-courses of physical processes. In contrast, non-equilibrium thermodynamics attempts to describe their time-courses in continuous detail.

Equilibrium thermodynamics restricts its considerations to processes that have initial and final states of thermodynamic equilibrium; the time-courses of processes are deliberately ignored. Consequently, equilibrium thermodynamics allows processes that pass through states far from thermodynamic equilibrium that cannot be described even by the variables admitted for non-equilibrium thermodynamics such as time rates of change of temperature and pressure. For example, in equilibrium thermodynamics, a process is allowed to include even a violent explosion that cannot be described by non-equilibrium thermodynamics. Equilibrium thermodynamics does, however, for theoretical development, use the idealized concept of the "quasi-static process". A quasi-static process is a conceptual (timeless and physically impossible) smooth mathematical passage along a continuous path of states of thermodynamic equilibrium. It is an exercise in differential geometry rather than a process that could occur in actuality.

Non-equilibrium state variables

The suitable relationship that defines non-equilibrium thermodynamic state variables is as follows:

When a system happens to be in states that is sufficiently close to thermodynamic equilibrium, non-equilibrium state variables are such that they can be measured locally with sufficient accuracy by the same techniques as are used to measure thermodynamic state variables, or by corresponding time and space derivatives, including fluxes of matter and energy.

In general, non-equilibrium thermodynamic systems are spatially and temporally non-uniform, but their non-uniformity still has a sufficient degree of smoothness to support the existence of suitable time and space derivatives of non-equilibrium state variables. Because of the spatial non-uniformity, non-equilibrium state variables that correspond to extensive thermodynamic state variables have to be defined as spatial densities of the corresponding extensive equilibrium state variables. On occasions when the system is sufficiently close to thermodynamic equilibrium, intensive non-equilibrium state variables, for example temperature and pressure, correspond closely with equilibrium state variables. It is necessary that measuring probes be small enough, and rapidly enough responding, to capture relevant non-uniformity. Further, the non-equilibrium state variables are required to be mathematically functionally related to one another in ways that suitably resemble corresponding relations between equilibrium thermodynamic state variables.

Living organisms and communities of living organisms are non-equilibrium systems

All biological systems by definition are not in thermodynamic equilibrium; for they are changing or can be triggered to change over time, and are continuously and discontinuously subject to flux of matter and energy to and from other systems and to chemical reactions.

Defining a conceptual framework for a non-equilibrium biological systems based on thermodynamics principles used for modeling non-biological systems

Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is attempting to describe continuous time-courses, need its state variables to have a very close connection with those of equilibrium thermodynamics. Utilizing non-equilibrium thermodynamics principals for dealing with biological and evolutionary concepts requires the development of conceptual framework.

Metastability – the operator of the behavioral function of biological systems

In physics, metastability denotes the phenomenon when a dynamical system spends an extended time in a configuration other than the system's state of least energy. During a metastable state of finite lifetime, all state-describing parameters reach and hold a stationary value:

The state of least energy is the only one the system will inhabit for an indefinite length of time, until more external energy is added to the system (unique "absolutely stable" state);

The system will spontaneously leave any other state (of higher energy) to eventually return (after a sequence of transitions) to the least energetic state.

Isomerization is another strategy for achieving metastability. Higher energy isomers are long lived as they are prevented from rearranging to their preferred ground state by (possibly large) barriers in the potential energy.

The metastability concept originated in the physics of first-order phase transitions. It then acquired new meaning in the study of aggregated subatomic particles (in atomic nuclei or in atoms) or in molecules, macromolecules or clusters of atoms and molecules. Later, it was borrowed for the study of decision-making and information transmission systems.

Metastability is common in physics and chemistry – from an atom (many-body assembly) to statistical ensembles of molecules (viscous fluids, amorphous solids, liquid crystals, minerals, etc.) at molecular levels or as a whole (see metastable states of matter and grain piles below). The abundance of states is more prevalent as the systems grow larger and/or if the forces of their mutual interaction are spatially less uniform or more diverse.

In dynamic systems (with feedbacks from variables) like logic decisional systems and neuroscience – the time invariance of the active or reactive patterns with respect to the external influences defines stability and metastability, In these systems, the equivalent of thermal fluctuations in molecular systems is the "white noise" that affects signal propagation and the decision-making.

Logic is the mechanism of tactics to drive a non-equilibrium system into a state of metastability

Equilibrium state variables are the ones that measure the state of the internal systems (i.e. visceral perception) relative to the optimal state of a perceived equilibrium (the notion of the state) it is done by sensors that measure the level of entropy in the system (a quantity representing the unavailability of a system's thermal energy for conversion into mechanical work, often interpreted as the degree of disorder or randomness in the system).

The somatosensory system is the system that was responsible for the assessment of the metastability in early organisms utilizing afferent sensory neurons and pathways that respond to changes at the surface or inside the body. The axons of sensory neurons connect with, or respond to, various receptor cells. These sensory receptor cells are activated by different stimuli giving a functional meme to the responding sensory neuron, such as a thermoreceptor which carries information about temperature changes. Other types include mechanoreceptors, chemoreceptors, and nociceptors and they send signals along a sensory nerve to the spinal cord where they may be processed by other sensory neurons and then relayed to the brain for further processing. Sensory receptors are found all over the body including the skin, epithelial tissues, muscles, bones and joints, internal organs, and the cardiovascular system.

Somatic senses are sometimes referred to as somesthetic senses, with the understanding that somesthesis includes the sense of touch, proprioception (sense of position and movement), and (depending on usage) haptic perception.

The mapping of the body surfaces in the brain is called a cortical homunculus and plays a fundamental role in the creation of body image. This brain-surface (i.e. cortical) map is not immutable, however. Dramatic shifts can occur in response to stroke or injury.

The sensory nervous system is a part of the nervous system responsible for processing sensory information. A sensory system consists of sensory neurons (including the sensory receptor cells), neural pathways, and parts of the brain involved in sensory perception. Commonly recognized sensory systems are those for vision, hearing, touch, taste, smell, and balance. In short, senses are transducers from the physical world to the realm of the mind where we interpret the information, creating our perception of the world surrounding organisms.

The receptive field is the area of the body or environment to which a receptor organ and receptor cells respond. For instance, the part of the environment that an eye can intercept is its receptive field; the light that each rod or cone can see, is its receptive field. Receptive fields have been identified for the visual system, auditory system and somatosensory system.

The relative level of entropy is collected via the somatosensory system and other senses responsible for physical proprioception input creating a function declaration (defines a named function variable without requiring variable assignment) that can fit into one or more visceral discipline functions.

The output of the metastability state is a product of the physical proprioception systems that motivate the haptic perception for motile function:

The somatosensory is the entity responsible for the output of the statement in the form of haptic notion of the logic function, which can be negative or positive, if the notion is positive then the entropy state is closer to a state of equilibrium and no action is needed but if the notion is negative and the entropy levels are declining than an action is needed.

The notion is the signal for a motion which and the function is an action to regain metastability by executing a strategy of behaviors. The notion is the apparatus for the strategy and it is the operator of the haptic perception which is the

The sense of spatial orientation the first visceral function of motility

The sense of spatial orientation was the first notion setting variable for the first motile function of behavioral motility utilizing spatial orientation of isomers for the function of navigation in two opposite direction on a single dimension vertical axis – up or down.

The initial sense of spatial orientation was based on monitoring chemical reactions in hydrocarbons that create

The plain field for the movement was

The mechanism of motility in animals include a function of logic

Motility in animals is based on a linear mechanism of 3 functions (unlike the motile mechanism in visceral function that operated the motility in organism that was based on two functions the first is metastability declaration function and the second is execution of motile function which can be referred to as reflexive function):

Metastability state declaration function

Establish visceral perception declaration utilizing Somatic senses to measure concurrent internal state variables of an organism relative to a database of optimal state variables

The internal state variables are in two groups:

  • Measure of the internal physiological state of entropy
  • Measure of the external environmental variables contributing to the internal state of entropy
Planning of motile function

Identification of environmental variable via perceptual sensors that belongs to one of the three groups:

  • Variables that are causing or can cause a reduction of metastability (hazards, predators etc.)
  • Variables that can support an increase of metastability (nutrition)
  • Variable of motile mediums and environmental properties that can be used for execution of motile function
Execution of motile function

Establish haptic declaration of orientation and relativity to the environmental mediums and properties all the way to the nearest target of motile function (i.e. plan the rout from point A to Point B)

Operation of motile organs to perform the function of motility utilizing environmental medium and properties

Fundamental adaptations for fundamentally different environments – from living in the Hydrosphere to living on the Lithosphere and being dependent on the Atmosphere

A motile creature with adaptation to aquatic biosphere experience all the information in 3D and its life are limited to one medium – water: in this environment weightless floating and throttling fins are sufficient for movement and electrical, olfactory and visual sensors together with basic brain modules and basic capabilities are sufficient for fulfilling the tasks of orientation and navigation. In the aquatic environment fitness strategies do not rely on many brain parts and neurological circuits and all of the energetic needs are easily answered via rudimentary cognition.

Sharks for example maximized their evolutionary process with the design of the white shark et Al type of physical properties, efficient propulsion based locomotion and sensory and weaponry arsenal that can maintain surplus or equalized energetic balance and EROEI and thus the species reached the peak of it evolutionary process and the developmental diversifying into sister groups with different variations of later designs for niche adaptation are not affecting the prototype evolutionary stagnation.

The transition of an aquatic creature like the shark into a terrestrial animal like the wolf requires a fundamental adaptation to take place and a new fitness strategy must emerge and evolve in order to adjust to a fundamentally different environment of an fundamentally different properties of the abiotic mediums of air and being limited (at least in the beginning) to a habitat that include only 2 dimensional movement (left/right, forward/backward and all the angles in between) on surfaces of land and structures, new challenges arisen from the properties of the new mediums that construct the terrestrial environment:

Surrounded by Atmosphere (air/gas) instead of being submerged in the Hydrosphere (liquid): as the only medium for respiration, for sensory interception of photons with wider spectrum of wave frequencies, inferior acoustics and pressure wave transmit over distances with faster echoing and surfaces distortion, poor and chaotic carrier for high concentration wad of olfactory molecules but also with series hazards such as wider and stronger solar radiation with less protection from the hazardous infrared radiation and higher levels of ultraviolet radiation higher when climbing in altitudes, higher temperatures variability and extremes such as the temperature range of the water which its lower limit is above zero Celsius at sea level pressure vs. the lower range of terrestrial environments temperatures at sea level of −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F, 184.0 K), in other words aquatic animal do not have to deal with the risk of freezing because if that happened their environment would also be nulled, hydration presents a fundamental limitation in every terrestrial habitat. Other hazardous factors of the atmospheric environment arise by the flow and movement of the gas molecules between higher and lower barometric pressure areas such as the long range and wide spread of bacteria’s and other pathogens over geographic areas and many more abiotic hazards such as weather conditions, precipitation and others.

Living on the Lithosphere with the constant energetic burden of Gravity instead of energetically neutral weightless floatation: dependency on 2 dimensional surfaces aligned to gravity or gradable structures is presenting real challenges such as energetic challenges of movement and the cognitive challenge operating complex biomechanics and for orientation in the limiting environment and the challenges and limitations arise from the atmospheric medium being the only source for sensory information interception which is required for traveling on the surface. Living on the surface of objects in the lithosphere is presenting many hazardous threats and limitations when traveling: vertical structures that block the way and the view, vertical gaps where animals can fall into and all due to gravity.

A major adaptation is needed physically and the biomechanical parts are only one aspect of the adaptation, the second aspect is cognitive adaptation which must also profoundly evolve in order to operate such biomechanical functions under the energetic burden and limitations of gravity in an atmospheric environment which is especially crucial for a quadruped performing locomotion gaits and dynamically balancing the body (including other parts that not part of the biomechanics) to gravity in accordance to other thermodynamics forces which governing the movement as well as the arrangements and the sizes of the body parts (head, tail, digestive system etc.) which have to follow that fundamentals while taking in consideration for the design the energetic expenditure of thermoregulation and feeding strategy.

And although the physical challenges of changing fundamental environment of certain living medium and perceptual perspective are immense the bigger challenge is to tie all the biological development into operation and follow a fitness strategy which demands new cognitive strategy based on the new perspective for orienting and navigating in the 2 dimensional habitats.

Moving between fundamental environments is the main factor in species cognitive abilities the secondary one is the level of adaptation needed for reaching equilibrium in specific fundamental environment.

After a certain genotype of certain phenotypic design reached equilibrium in a certain environment it will spread to the extent of its environment boundaries the lineage will reach the maximum limitation of its ecosystem caring capacity, at this point a lineage evolution will stagnate but as conditions changes and new niches emerge it will start to develop into sister groups and branch into new variations with similar genotype and cognition but not necessarily similar phenotype of physical and behavioral characteristics (e.g. in aquatic environment sharks achieved fundamental adaptation and other type of more specialized sister species evolved such as nurse sharks, manta rays, hammer heads etc.).

A lineage reach the state of complete adaptation will be considered as outgroup and as new ecological niches emerge it will start branching into more specialized versions or sister group adapted for more specific nieces in the same fundamental environment.

Every time a lineage achieves a complete transition between two environment fundamentals the lineage also experienced a leap forward in its cognition.

The main factors in cognitive evolution of a species are the combination of the environment fundamentals and selected locomotion strategy for movement

The environmental fundamental adaptation factors:
  • The dimensions available movement in the environment – 2D vs. 3D
  • The complexity of the environment – the quantity, distribution and variation of objects and surfaces available for locomotion, orientation and navigation.
  • The distribution and location of energetically resources available for consumption.
The dimensions available for movement in an environment are the drivers for motile adaptation and the driver for cognitive evolution

The most fundamental drivers for movement in an environment are the number of available dimensions for movement, there are 2 types of fundamental environments:

  • 3 Dimension mediums – medium of bodies of water (e.g. oceans), medium of bodies gas (e.g. atmosphere) and medium of bodies of land mass (e.g. underground)
  • 2 Dimension environments – surfaces and structures (e.g. on top of ground, rocks, trees etc.)
The three dimensional (3D) environment movement fundamentals

Animals swimming in the water, flying in the air, digging tunnels under the ground surface or move between branches in a forest canapé have three dimensions available for their movement (X,Y and Z: up/down, forward/backward and left/right). All the animals with adaptation for 3D movement in 3D environment obeys the same fundamental rules

The two dimensional (2D) environment movement fundamentals

Animals moving on a surface (ground, branches, rocks, ocean bed etc.) have only two dimensions available for their movement (X and Y: forward/backward and left/ right). All of the other adaptations are just a derivative of these fundamental adaptations. All the animals adapted for 2D movement in 2D environment obeys the same fundamental rules

All organisms moving in 3 dimensions will obey the same environment movement fundamentals but their method of movement (locomotion) in their specific habitat may differ: fish and squid living in the 3D environment of water, bat and bird living in the 3D environment of gas (air) and monkey living in the 3D environment of the forest canapé will be subject to the same fundamentals of navigation and orientation in a 3D environment, while a dear, bear, snake and spider will obey the fundamental rules of navigation and orientation in a 2D environment.

Species primary adaptation strategy – the main fitness strategy to environmental fundamentals

A fundamental environment obtain a certain limitations that are dependent not only on its essential properties of the mediums of liquid or gas (air or water) which govern the crucial laws of physics and the rules thermodynamics for a movement in such environment but also by the structural complexity of such environment which determine the available methods for orientation, navigation and type of locomotion.

The different environmental fundamentals present different type of approaches and methods possibilities for a motile organism.

There are few factors in a species adaptation to a fundamental environment that will define the type of locomotion strategy such as the genetic assets and the availability, the distribution of the energetic resources and threats (which define the feeding strategy). The type of locomotion strategy can be based on agility – high speed movement or passivity – low speed movement and though will define the type and level of cognitive adaption.

The fundamental fitness strategy of a species is the methods of utilization of the environmental fundamental factors and that will determine its locomotion and its cognitive adaptation.

The basic rules of adaptation and transition between fundamental environments

Every time a species transit from one fundamental environment to another, the first main adaptation is a major cognitive change that is needed to achieve fitness when moving and navigating in certain environment: locomotion in a 3D environment and in a 2D environment demand very different cognitive tools.

The complexity or the simplicity of an environment structures and arrangement are drivers for cognitive evolution and “leap forward” in cognition

The main factors in cognitive leaps forward are the transition between fundamental environments:

  • Fish achieved rudimentary cognition for the only 3D environment they have evolved to live in
  • Birds and bats that evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals and into volant animals (3D to 2D and to 3D) and have achieved a higher cognition due to the extreme limitation of the weight of their head and skeletons in order to fly (insect’s limited size is due to the breathing method of tracheae).
  • Land mammals (including mammals that walk on the surface of branches) that evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals (3D to 2D) have achieved a higher cognition due to the moderate limitation of the weight of their head in order to be supported by their neck (the variation of their cognition is usually defined by the complexity of their environment)
  • Lesser apes such as Hylobatidae (gibbons) that use the trajectory brachiation locomotion evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals and into type of arboreal-volant animal performing parabolic trajectories in high speed in the forest’s canapé (3D to 2D and to 3D) have achieved the fourth highest cognition due to their extreme agility and the complexity of their environment and due to the limitation of the weight of their head by such type of locomotion which can be achieved only if their total body weight is not too high for be supported by the branches (although hanging from branches align the head with the neck and the body to the center of gravity)
  • Ocean mammals like dolphins that evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals and back into pelagic animals (3D to 2D and to 3D) have achieved the third highest cognition due to the lack of limitation of the weight of their head that is supported by the water but they didn’t evolve further due to the low complexity of their environment (sea lions and other animals that need to breed on land are still limited by the size and weight of the head)
  • Apes such as the pan members that use brachiation locomotion and quadruple locomotion evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals to arboreal-volant animal and for semi-arboreal semi-terrestrial (3D to 2D to 3D to semi 2D i.e. living between the 3D of the canapé and the ground) achieved the second highest cognition due to the larger size of their brain relative to the larger size of their body and limited by their quadruped posture (which pressure their neck).
  • Humans that evolved from pelagic animals to terrestrial animals to arboreal-volant animal and back into terrestrial (3D to 2D to 3D and back to 2D) have achieved the highest non-rudimentary cognition due to the lack of limitation of the weight of their head as bipedal animal.

Achieving absolute adaptation to environment fundamentals (i.e. medium of existence, medium of movement and mediums of perception) creates lineages adaptation to certain locomotion design or certain feeding niche diversify the linage the definition of species and other classes of organisms is obscuring the dynamics of the process of evolution where linages of certain filament of DNA revolving in equilibrium or evolving and changing incrementally over generational of reproduction and pruning of unsuccessful or unlucky DNA sequence, the ones that were subdued to extinction by conditions changing unfavorable to their phenotypic expression.

The absolute-adaptation process is deemed as success (into certain locomotion design and perceptual medium of movement i.e. 3D/2D, Swimming/flying/brachiating/walking on four/two, movement medium of water/air/ground/underground etc.) if survival equilibrium was achieved by a certain sequence of DNA at this point the following process is the diversification of the DNA into more advanced forms capitalizing on the first successful design.

In any lineage there was one sequence of DNA which achieved the absolute-adaptation: for example there was one species in the human lineage that complete the geographical transit and physiological transition from the 3D environment of the oceans to the 2D environment of the land and by that complete absolute adaptation and reached equilibrium (a certain species of amphibian) from that point it started to branch into sister groups that obeys to the same fundamentals of the terrestrial 2D environment after that stage diversification emerge and certain strands of DNA mutate the designs of individuals and incrementally adapted different fitness strategies for moving around and performing feeding and reproducing in accordance to specific habitat’s niche’s attributes (e.g. resources, terrain etc.).

For a species, reaching adaptation for certain fundamental environment is the most challenging of all evolutionary processes as it demands also fundamental cognitive adaptation which is correlated to specific phenotypic properties and cognitive potential (i.e. the cognitive change in the simple nerve system of an insect becoming aquatic is not as major (due to genotypic limitations) as for large, long legged, otter-like mammal with big brain going the same path and becomes a whale).

If a lineage of animal never changed it environment after reaching the equilibrium, its brain will remain almost the same for as long as it is still lives in the same environment, same for all of its descendants and branches: they may have extreme size and weight variations but their cognition will be very similar until one branch will go through another environmental transition requiring fundamental adaptations, for example one fish species have reached equilibrium of design hundreds of million years ago and although since fish spread into almost every 3D underwater habitat niches, their cognition have stayed mostly unchanged since it reached the point of equilibrium in such fundamental environment, Dolphins on the other hand had the same evolutionary adaptation for 3D environment fundamentals as fish, but then they moved out of the ocean and adapt for living on the land in 2D environment, and once more moved to the oceans where again they adapt to 3D environment and although the phenotypic physics of Dolphins evolved to be very similar to fish, their genetic heritage of three transitions and adaptations can be observed in the differences between their brain size and complexity and their corresponding cognitions observed as phenotypic behaviors.

Fish have never changed their original fundamental environment and its cognition has stayed at the same since, the lineage of Dolphins currently classified as cetaceans, changed their fundamental environment 3 times and their cognition is highly developed as a result.

Dolphins’ intelligent is also supreme to all the land animals that went through 2 absolute-adaptations such as dogs and cats, and is in a similar level to animals reached the equilibrium point of the absolute-adaptation the same number of times – the Primates (water (3D), land (2D) and forest canapé (3D)), and all of their cognitions are inferior to the one cognition possessed by Humans which achieved 4 absolute-adaptations.

A species cognitive abilities and intelligence goes together with the number of transitions between fundamental environments as it accumulates more cognitive heritage in the process.

We are the species with the highest number of transitions between fundamental environments:

We had the same evolutionary adaptation for 3D environment in the early oceans, than we moved to the land and adapt for living in 2D environment, then we transit into the 3D environment of the forest canopy and again we landed on the ground and adapt for living in 2D environment.

New brain modules for new motile challenges presented by living on land

As our ancestors transition to land new cognitive system was developed to synchronize the mechanical parts and to direct the machine towards food and away from danger, with new or upgraded sensors to orient and to direct itself in the right direction and through the optimal path in order to locate food, mate or to distance itself away from enemies.

The new cognitive system was based on new and enhanced brain tissue and modules integrated into new or enhanced sensory modules creating new sensory based perceptual system.

The new cognitive system was very different and much more advanced than the previous aquatic cognitive system that was sufficient for maintaining equalized or positive energetic balance and EROEI in the 3 dimensional aquatic weightless floating in the pelagic zone easily throttling with minimal energetic expenditures. The liquid medium of motility activities, locomotion strategy and thermodynamics made it easy to travel efficiently and fast over large distances and landscapes in a bird view perspective, where the pelagic environment is always the same, with no need for thermoregulation due to the gradual and limited range of thermal fluctuations and steady temperatures in large zones of certain altitudes and depth a zone where all of the information for orientation and navigation and motile activities is easily intercepted directly from the highly conductive medium which compose their entire living habitat.

From wiki: “Pelagic fish live in the pelagic zone of ocean or lake waters – being neither close to the bottom nor near the shore – in contrast with demersal fish, which do live on or near the bottom, and reef fish, which are associated with coral reefs”

The transition from the fundamentals which are governing the phenotype of an animal in an aquatic environment, to the fundamentals governing the life of an animal in a terrestrial environment, demanding major morphological, physiological and cognitive adaptation.

When our ancestors transit into the land and developed traits for terrestrial environment and overcome the most important evolutionary obstacles of respiration, dehydration and thermoregulation, they also achieved an energetically and biomechanically efficient design of quadruple locomotion where the body is aligned vertically to gravity, supported by 4 limbs with the head and tail balancing each other horizontal spread of weight and opposing each other to oppose g-force force when changing course during gait.

Once the basic design was achieved evolution turned its focused on the haptic perception in the limitation of the 2 dimensional perspective where the censors are now in a medium that have no electrical conductivity, and the properties of gas reducing significantly the distances pressure waves (sound) can travel also the interception field available for capturing visual data and sound, are limited by the surrounding objects and surfaces.

The sensory perception of the pelagic animal went through stages in the process of transitioning from pelagic living to terrestrial living.

The first stage was transitioning from the pelagic lifestyle to demersal lifestyle; at this point the perceptual point of view evolved to answer the challenges arise from the limitations of the 2 dimension view field of an animal that living on vertical or horizontal surfaces on the bottom of the ocean, on ground or on the surfaces of objects (e.g. rocks, branches etc.).

The evolutionary stage of becoming demersal enable an easier evolutionary process of transition and adapting to terrestrial locomotion and orientation (without having the need yet for adapting to respiration of gas which came later), the demersal animal could gradually evolve for terrestrial locomotion while maintaining similar strategies for conducting motile activities as a surface animal on the seabed (together with the fact that there was no real threat to intervene in the fragile stage of adaptation locomotion in gravity when limited movement on the water edge makes the first pioneers an easy target for predation , and maybe that is the reason that it only happened at that time of the “D-day” of the animals invasion at the preliminary succession of the lithosphere.

Once the demersal animal completed the first requirement of respiration for terrestrial living the evolutionary focus shifted to more important adaptation of the locomotion in the unforgiving lithospheric environment ruled by a strong force of gravity demanding higher energetic expenditures for mobilizing increasing units of mass, and thermodynamics that govern increasing energetic expenditure for traveling over distances and for accelerating the speed of such mass and many other new hazards of the terrestrial environment such as finding water, falling from heights, and high range of thermal fluctuations daily and between weather conditions an seasons that can dehydrate or refrigerate all represented a new governing rules for energy sensitive systems where efficient locomotion with positive EROEI, thermoregulations and was a must for achieving fitness and for conducting all the existential activities.

In the apparatus of energy conservation strategy life started to adapt into amphibian animals and later for fully terrestrial animals which their adaptation process was driven by the vast availability of energy in the sugars produced by the photosynthesis of the early flora that was already developed for eons (and enriching the atmosphere with high levels of oxygen) and covered vast areas of the terrestrial land coupled with the nutrition of early colonizers such as insects that have already inhabit the early fauna.

The sensory perception that was suitable for living on the surface of water bodies needed also to adapt and ones the quadrupled design emerge as the optimal design for terrestrial locomotion other strategies emerge both physical and cognitive for enhancing its EROEI and functionality.

As the animals transition from water to land completed the focused first shifted to cognitive and sensory adaptation a new system for producing motile activities emerged and was dependent on new sensory systems based on smell, vision and sound with an increasing cognitive abilities based on new brain modules, produced more complex strategies for dealing with the lithospheric environment more demanding conditions.

The cognition was the main focus factor of the different fitness strategies of the early terrestrial animals rather than the morphology and the rudimentary control of the common phenotypic design which was shared in various variations by the new terrestrial linages of both our ancestors the early mammals and by the reptiles that inherit the world after them.

The variations that can be observed are insignificant changes in the external quadruple design such as bigger bodies, different proportions, postures and muscles, differences in the head and tail and other adaptations to different feeding strategies and habitat niches, other variations are in phenotypic expressions of claws, teeth such as stronger jaws or limbs with bigger and longer claws and fangs in carnivore for the purpose of predation, yet not fundamentally different in their functionality, design and cognitive management than the one that they are preying on such as herbivore living and operating on the same surface of the same habitat .

Once a new physical design was achieved most of the evolutionary changes that took place where focused on improving the EROEI and survivability by either one or by the combination of cognitive evolution for developing cognitive strategies and physical evolution to achieve advantageous position with size, strength, agility or others.

The genetic assets of a species can suggest the spectrum of evolutionary routs

Although the energetic balance state and trend of a species and its evolutionary trend are correlated to the energetic states and trends in its ecological community, the species spectrum or the genetic potential of the possible evolutionary rout of morphological process, is determined by the genetics factors or the genotype of an organism:

Genotype: is the part of the DNA sequence responsible for the genetic makeup of a cell, and therefore of an organism or individual, which determines a specific characteristic (phenotype) of that cell/organism/individual.

Genotype is one of three factors that determine phenotype, the second factor is the inherited arsenal of traits from earlier evolutionary adaptation of bodily and cognitive modules that are rudimentary/dormant or that are currently in use for other tasks but can be updated, modified or converted to perform the new needed tasks to overcome new conditions, and the third is the non-inherited environmental (abiotic and community of life) factors.

Phenotype: is the composite of an organism's observable characteristics or traits, such as its morphology (the change in the form and structure of organisms and in their specific structural features), development, biochemical or physiological properties, behavior, and products of behavior. A phenotype results from the expression of an organism's genetic code, its genotype, as well as the influence of environmental factors and the interactions between the two. When two or more clearly different phenotypes exist in the same population of a species, the species is called polymorphic.

Tracking species' states and evolutionary trends

To track an evolutionary process of a long gone extinct species based on ancient abiotic factors data, genetic data, limited fossil record and living relatives that have evolved further from the ancestors, demands research methods that are more holistic and which are based on methods used in theoretical physics that are utilizing the principals of thermodynamics to assess and model biological systems by assessing the energetic balance and the state of individuals organisms and species such as the energy stored as mass, the stock of potential work energy (ability to function) and the EROEI of activities all in the context of the energy stocks, flow and exchange between the entire web of life and its interaction with the energetic apparatus of the environmental systems of abiotic factors.

The survivability potential of an organism and a species can be delineated by its energetic efficiency and it is measured by the Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI) and thus can delineated the organisms’ evolutionary state and trends.

Biological systems are systems of energy acquisition and storage; the exchange of energy within and between biological systems and their environment is the engine of life and evolution. The exchange of energy within and between biological systems can be defined by the specification of such activities, living organisms perform many activities; some are internal and rudimentary, and some are external or behavioral: all the activities performed by Individual biological systems can be grouped into two fundamental categories:

  • Energy input oriented activities
  • Energy output oriented activities

The balance of these two activities is measured in EROEI (Energy Return (input) On Energy Invested (input)) and in the accumulated energy stock measured by metabolized calories stored in the mass of organisms.

The measure of the states and trends of specie’s individuals, classes and groups can predict the evolutionary direction of a species:

We can observe the emerge of evolutionary trends in a species by measuring the short term and lifetime EROEI of their input activities and the short term levels of the stocks of working energy that is stored in the mass of individuals in accordance to their specific energetic need during each stage in their life histories and developmental stages (e.g. growing stages or adulthood), we can then compare to previous generations of individuals to identify generational changes in species energetic balance and stocks that suggest an evolutionary trends.

Measuring concurrent states and short term trends of specie’s individuals/classes/groups

Daily EROEI (short term state): measures the concurrent state of individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: measured by deducting the amount of energy output from the amount of energy input during the term of one planetary rotational cycle of 24 hours which includes all the daily activities as in the case of primates, or by averaging another short term cycle such as metabolic cycle, seasonal cycle etc. as in the case of other organism:

  • If the resulting daily EROEI is negative than the individual is in a state of short term energetic deficit
  • If the resulting daily EROEI is positive than the individual is in a state of short term energetic surplus
  • If the resulting daily EROEI is equalized than the individual is in a state of short term energetic equilibrium

Daily energy stock balance (short term trend): measures the short term trend in the energetic stock of individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: calculated by adding the daily EROEI at the end of the daily cycle to the stocks of energy (that was stored in the mass of individual organism, at the beginning of the daily cycle (or other short term cycle):

  • If the resulting daily energy stock balance is negative than the individual’s short term trend is of recession
  • If the resulting daily energy stock balance is positive than the individual’s short term trend is of affluent
  • If the resulting daily energy stock balance is equalized than the individual’s short term trend is of equilibrium

Any change in the environmental conditions in the organism’s habitat will change the energetic balance between the daily activities and will affect its long term survivability and the generational evolutionary trends of its population (and species). Monitoring the short term level of stocks of energy of individuals within a species, can highlight the points of transition between positive, equalized and negative energetic balance which in term can indicate short term trends as well as change in the direction of long term evolutionary trends in a species and can indicate changes in species fitness strategies.

Measuring longer term states and trends of specie’s individuals/classes/groups at a defined developmental stage or during defined periods of time

Longer term EROEI trend – measuring the success of the behavioral part of the fitness strategy during the span of defined period of time or life histories stage (adolescents, adulthood etc.) of an individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: calculated by factoring in a matrix all the daily EROEI cycles values during the span of longer term periods of weeks, months and years:

  • If the resulting longer term EROEI trend is negative than the individual/group/species was/is in a chronic energetic deficit during the span of the defined period
  • If the resulting longer term EROEI trend is positive than the individual/group/species was/is in a constant or a developing energetic surplus during the span of the defined period
  • If the resulting longer term EROEI trend is equalized than the individual/group/species was/is in an energetic equilibrium during the span of the defined period

Longer term energy stock balance – measuring the success of the physiological part of the fitness strategy during the span of defined period of time or life histories stage of an in individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: calculated by factoring in a matrix all the daily stock balance values during the span of longer term periods of weeks, months and years:

  • If the resulting trend of all daily energy stock balance values is negative than the trend for individual/group/species body mass in the defined period of time is of contraction
  • If the resulting trend of all daily energy stock balance values is positive than the trend for individual/group/species body mass in the defined period of time is of development
  • If the resulting trend of all daily energy stock balance values is equalized than the trend for individual/group/species body mass in the defined period of time is of stagnation

By measuring longer terms cycles/period of monthly, yearly and seasonal energetic balance in individuals, groups and population by deducting the stock of stored energy at end of a cycle/period from the stocked energy at the beginning of a cycle to detect transitional foresees in the energetic balance between the species and its environment.

Measuring lifetime state and trends of a generation of specie’s individuals/classes/groups by lifetime EROEI trend and energy stock balance

Lifetime EROEI trend (from sexual maturity to death) – measure the aftermath success of the behavioral part of the fitness strategy of the past generations of an individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: calculated by factoring in a matrix all the daily EROEI cycles values during the span of an organism lifetime:

  • If the resulting lifetime EROEI trend is negative than the individual/group/species was/were in a chronic energetic deficit and it suggest a failing behavioral fitness strategy
  • If the resulting lifetime EROEI trend is positive than the individual/group/species was/were in a constant or developing energetic surplus and it suggest a development of a successful behavioral fitness strategy
  • If the resulting lifetime EROEI trend is equalized than the individual/group/species was/were in an energetic equilibrium and it suggest a continuum of an optimal behavioral fitness strategy

Lifetime energy stock balance (from sexual maturity to death) – prospect the morphological trends of the physiological part of the fitness strategy in the next generation of in individual organism and groups of individual organisms of same species: calculated by factoring in a matrix all the daily energetic balance values during the span of an organism lifetime:

  • If the resulting lifetime trend of all daily energy stock balance values in individual/group/species was/were in a decline than the prospect of morphological contraction in the next generation of individual/group/species is more probable
  • If the resulting lifetime trend of all daily energy stock balance values in individual/group/species was/were is in developing surplus than the prospects of morphological development in the next generation of individual/group/species is more probable
  • If the resulting lifetime trend of all daily energy stock balance values in individual/group/species was/were equalized than the trend for individual/group/species is physiological stagnation in the next generation is more probable

The stored energy in each level of the web of life and the flow and exchange of energy between biological systems and environmental systems can describe the properties of the community of life and can identify their interactions with each other at every levels of the food chain and can be describe the behaviors or fitness strategies of an organism.

Evolutionary processes fundamentals

The most important tasks of individuals of a species are eating, mating and reproduce in a way that is ensuring the survival of the minimum number of offspring’s that are required for growing the population size in times of development or recession in the ecosystem; when an ecosystem reaches the state of climax community the reproduction requirement become less demanding; just enough offspring for maintaining the population size.

When the energetic balance is drawn to the negative side due to recession in the ecosystem (which ignite competition for diminishing resources and habitat) or introduction of a threat initially the main strategy focus shift into minimalizing the energy and time invested in regular less urgent activities such socializing to compensate for the time and energy invested in the important activities or waste of time and energy passively consumed by the enforcement of unproductive behavioral activities such as fighting, hiding, escaping etc.

Every activity other than the necessity can jeopardize animal’s energetic balance constant which result in a negative EROEI and are not directly contributing for the process of energy consumption or reproduction or comes on the account of to the physical fitness supporting activities of consumption (foraging for food and eating, sleeping) and activities supporting wellbeing (sleeping, playing, socializing etc.).

These activities are all related for a non-equilibrium state of a species and a non-equilibrium state of its environment (a state of disturbance or a state of succession) this activities are all related for Intraspecies and interspecies competition (resources, space, mating) and basic survival rudiments (not being injured or killed).

Every strategy used or developed in order to address this kind of negative energetic state is considered a non-equilibrium strategy:
Social strategies are usually the result of a non-equilibrium state of a species.

Any type of social organization that consist outside the period of mating and parenting or that include more individuals in the group in excess of a core family (one male and one female and may include dependent juvenile and adolescent offspring)

Individualistic strategies are usually the result of a state of equilibrium of a species

Without the need to develop social strategies an animal will invest in the individuals of the species to ensure both genders will have maximum level of equilibrium, it means that both genders have equal or similar size, weight and physiology as a constant static state throughout the individuals life histories that will include maximum longevity and maximal lifespan which can last for many generations for as long as the environmental condition maintained.

The highest level of energetic equilibrium that can be reached by a species is the ability to maintain consistent average of positive daily EROEI throughout its total lifespan. Only a species that can maintain the highest level of energetic equilibrium for long periods can reach the maximum extended longevity, lifespan and fitness throughout its life histories.

Positive non-equilibrium evolutionary process of adaptation to improve the EROEI by consuming more energy:

Expansion of primary producer’s biomass, biodiversity and energetic values in the form of regular supply and availability of energetic products driving the habitat ecosystem towards equilibrium by forming parallel diversifying evolutionary processes in the communities of organism on the path to climax community. New traits are developing, maintained and improved.

Negative non-equilibrium evolutionary process of adaptation to improve the EROEI by reducing energy expenditures:

Recession of the primary producers’ results in diminishing biomass, biodiversity and energetic products (leafs, fruits etc.) and services (shelters, habitat) are negatively disturbing the EROEI and energetic balance of the consumers.

Consumers in respond will return to old traits as their more recent strategies which are based on latest traits start to fail in supplying the sufficient EROEI that previously supported such more energy expensive traits as well as the development of new traits.
Consumers will return to strategies of energy conservation which are antagonistic to developmental stages or counter developmental evolution i.e. regression. Energy expensive organs parts may also be in the brain where cognitive traits reside, and a “cognitive recession” will occur.

The quality of cognitive traits is depending upon the ancestral heritage of brain part and concurrent assets of functionality circuits.
Brain parts and modules can diminish, synaptic rearranged or completely repurpose when past biomechanical strategies which supported more agile locomotion strategies which demanded higher “cognitive infrastructure” for higher real-time processing become old cognitive infrastructure for older strategies based on previous ancestral adaptations which rendered obsolete as conditions changed (e.g. the brain of a bipedal primate traveling and navigating in speeds of 10-20K/h on the two dimensional surface does not need the cognitive agility of a ricochetal brachiation traveling and navigating in speeds of more than 50K/h in the three dimensional environment of the forest canopy).

 

Fitness strategy – the behavioral output of a physical system with a measurable or observable manifestations in organism’s internal and external systems of an evolutionary trend of adaptation

Fitness is the driver of all strategies and it can describe as the long term state of health and well-being of an organism to be better positioned for reproduction. Fitness is the ability of an organism to perform all aspects of daily activities by supporting the energetic expenditure while maintaining constant long run average of positive or equalized energetic balance in accordance to the animal’s life histories of developmental stages and ultimately successfully achieving the fulfillment of the most important task of living organism – reproduction. Fitness can only be achieved if the short term and long term EROEI and energetic balance of an organism are equalized in the end of the long term cycles and life histories stages.

Fitness strategy is the sum of all phenotypic strategies of physiological systems and behavioral tactics of inherit and learned traits and skills, that evolved as a result of incremental genetic mutations over generations of individual organisms that posteriori were beneficial for the processes of sexual selection, reproduction and for improving the survivability of their offspring’s which ultimately improved some individual organisms fitness which advance their reproduction and their genetically privileged offspring reproduction resulting in evolving homogenous genetics lineage adapting and multiplying and once they reach an equilibrium of individual fitness and stable population in the boundaries of their habitat carrying capacity they become a species.

Behavior: defines the range of actions and mannerisms made by individual and systems of organisms in conjunction with themselves or their environment, which includes their internal systems interactions (the cognitive system, the biochemistry in it cells, the biomechanics etc.) and their interaction with other intraspecies and interspecies systems of organisms and with the physical and structural environment and the abiotic factors. It is the response of an organism to various stimuli or inputs, whether internal or external, conscious or subconscious, overt or covert, and voluntary or involuntary.

Strategy: is an underlying rule for making decisions about a certain behavior, strategy provides an animal with a set of tactics that are adaptive in various circumstances. A tactic is the action that is taken by an animal in order to achieve a specific goal. For example, an animal encounters an obstacle and its strategy is defined by two tactics that may allow the animal to pass the obstacle: A. jump over it, B. crawl under it.

Considering the environmental conditions, the surroundings, and the size of the obstacle, the animal will decide between the two tactics dictated by its strategy. In the context of a mating system, this means that individuals in a given population have strategies that allow them to obtain mates in different ways to maximize their reproductive success given their phenotypic, environmental, or social circumstances. There are different types of strategies such as:

  • Dynamic strategies: are the aftermath of the adaptive responses of a species for constantly changing or unstable environmental, interspecies and intraspecies factors and conditions (such as in the case of responding to a recessional or developmental process in their ecosystem). Dynamic strategies may be considered Mendelian, developmental, conditional, or a combination of them:
  • Mendelian strategy: depends on a genetically determined phenotypic difference, such as body size and physiological modules and parts
  • Developmentally driven strategy: is associated with phenotypic differences caused by varying conditions during the course of development that affect physiological modules and parts.
  • Conditional behavior strategy: depends not on the genetic or developmental impact, but on external factors. These may include the cognitive ability to combine or sequence an arsenal of tactics under one behavior or a set of behaviors, the number and the sophistication of the sets and combinations of tactics which are employed in response for various situations and their success will be determine by the range of cognitive modularity, capacity and flexibility of an animal to calculatedly choose a proper more fine-tuned behavior in order to interact and react to a wider range of situations and circumstances with the lowest energetic expenditure and risks as possible, and this range of tactics form the spectrum of behavioral responses and the cognitive ability to invent, combine and memorize several tactics to produce new behaviors define the intelligence of an animal.

Stable strategy: the end result of a successful fitness strategy and it will occur when constant fitness of species has been achieved and it persists for as long as the environmental conditions prevail. Stable strategy represents stagnation in the process of evolutionary adaptation of a species and it is correlates to the state of a climax community or an ecosystem in a state of equilibrium.

In a state of equilibrium every organism and species conditional behavior strategies are adjusted and fine-tuned for optimizing its own energetic balance which minimize its impact on the community’s energy stocks and support the equalization of the total exchange and flow of energy in an ecosystem.

In a climax community the energetic needs of all the community species are at the optimal energetic balance or the minimal state of EROEI that is needed in order to maintain the fitness of organisms and species.

Species in a climax community maintain their population numbers and limit their energetic consumption at optimal energetic balance in accordance to their life histories stage and the optimal EROEI of the short term and long term cycles (daily activities, reproduction cycles etc.).

Fitness strategy defines the main trend in a species evolutionary process (it’s include organism’s biological and cognitive systems) and the direction of the development which aimed to achieve a state of fitness equilibrium by overcoming (adapting) the environmental challenges which affect their short term energetic balance and EROEI in a negative way.

Individualistic strategies in mammals are usually considered as R-selection species and group strategies are usually considered as r-selection species

Fitness can be improved in several ways depending on the urgency of the condition and the effect it have on reproduction and on the availability of genetic potential, it can be an adaptation for gradual or sudden changes in the environmental conditions or relative to certain condition regardless to the state of the ecosystem (such interspecies competition).

Phenotypic changes are incremental changes over generation in the responsible genes which survived after generations of being the favored traits for sexual selection (or by pure chance); there are few ways phenotypic changes occur:

  • By improvement of currently active traits – for example: a decrease in the mass and strength of certain groups of muscles and bones favored by sexual selection or in response to other conditions.
  • By moving forward a recently retrogressed trait – for example: an increase in the mass and strength of certain groups of muscles and bones favored by sexual selection in response to increasing intraspecies or interspecies aggression.
  • By “awakening” a retro-trait that was “dormant” for a very long time to perform the same tasks it was design for that once again has become useful for the animal fitness in the face of a new condition.
  • By transforming a trait to perform completely different tasks then it was design for in the face of a sudden new condition.

For example the process in which a species that have lost its tail due to energy conservation strategy is easily achieved but the opposite process of growing back a tail that is fully functional will take longer to achieve.

The process of a change in the properties and behaviors of organism’s systems and their subsystems over generations of sexual reproduction indicates, post factum, the strategies that drove a species evolutionary rout of behavioral (cognitive) and/or morphological (physical) adaptations which ultimately improved such species fitness.

Fitness strategy is the sum of organisms’ behavioral strategies and the physical properties of its internal systems

Fitness strategy can be defined and grouped by the functions of their behavioral cognitive output in the form of strategies which sometime incorporating internal subsystems of modules and parts that participate in and control all the physiological and cognitive activities:

Feeding strategy: determine and define the behavioral output of the energy acquisition process of set of activities and tactics that in motile animals that include foraging for items of stocked energy (food) and ends when the items of stocked energy are within the reach of the digestive systems (mouth) which is the entry point for the metabolic system.

Feeding strategy defined by and describes the systems of energetic consumption by individual organism within a species it include the following systems:

Energy metabolism, stocking and energy distribution systems: autonomic and rudimentary systems for utilizing the consumed objects of energy by processing (digesting), regulating energy utilization and outflow, stocking energy and distribution of the energy to the different systems that are involved and various activities and tasks supporting the organs, parts and modules that are included in the participation of all other activities and tasks which require metabolized work energy available for output for all the behaviors which are included in the fitness strategy.

Metabolism: the sum of all chemical reactions that occur in living organisms, including digestion and the transport of substances into and between different cells, in which case the set of reactions within the cells is called intermediary metabolism or intermediate metabolism.

Metabolism have three main purposes: the conversion of stocks of consumed energy (food) to work energy in order to run cellular processes, the conversion of food to building blocks for proteins, lipids, nucleic acids, and some carbohydrates, and the elimination of nitrogenous wastes.

These enzyme-catalyzed reactions allow organisms to grow and reproduce, maintain their structures, and to respond to their environments. Metabolism is usually divided into two categories:

  • Catabolism: the breaking down of organic matter, for example, by cellular respiration.
  • Anabolism: the building up of components of cells such as proteins and nucleic acids.

The chemical reactions of metabolism are organized into metabolic pathways, in which one chemical is transformed through a series of steps into another chemical, by a sequence of enzymes. Enzymes are crucial to metabolism because they allow organisms to drive desirable reactions that require energy that will not occur by itself, by coupling them to spontaneous reactions that release energy. Enzymes act as catalysts that allow the reactions to proceed more rapidly. Enzymes also allow the regulation of metabolic pathways in response to changes in the cell's environment or to signals from other cells.

The metabolic system of a particular organism determines which substances it will find nutritious and which poisonous. The speed of metabolism, the metabolic rate, influences how much energy (food) an organism will require, and also affects how it is able to obtain that food.

One of the features of metabolism is the similarity of the basic metabolic pathways and components between even vastly different species. For example, the set of carboxylic acids (the intermediates in the citric acid cycle) are present in all known organisms, being found in species as diverse as the unicellular bacterium Escherichia coli and huge multicellular organisms like elephants. These striking similarities in metabolic pathways are likely due to their early appearance in evolutionary history, and their retention because of their efficacy. The metabolic system includes the following systems and their parts:

  • Digestive system: digestion and processing food with salivary glands, esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, intestines, rectum and anus.
  • Urinary system: kidneys, ureters, bladder and urethra involved in fluid balance, electrolyte balance and excretion of urine.

Locomotion strategy: is the behavioral output of a motile organism and it includes all the systems involved in the motor control and the mechanisms which responsible for the execution and the performance of motile activities such as walking, running, climbing, swimming, brachiation etc. intended for performing all type of movement required by the feeding and reproduction strategies. The locomotion systems and parts include skeleton, muscles, nerves, blood systems etc.:

  • Muscular system: allows for manipulation of the environment, provides locomotion, maintains posture, and produces heat. Includes skeletal muscles, smooth muscles and cardiac muscle.
  • Skeletal system: structural support and protection with bones, cartilage, ligaments and tendons

Reproduction strategy: behavioral and physiological systems that are involved in and supporting the activity of duplicating the genetics of males and females from one generation of organism to the next generations and for ensuring the survival of the offspring’s, the activities of reproduction includes courtship, engagement, sexual interaction and intercourse, and the different sets of activities performed by the breeding animals for ensuring the survival of their offspring’s such as mass reproduction, single parent, coupling, nourishing, protection, education etc. The reproductive system includes the following systems and their parts:

  • Reproductive system: the sex organs, such as ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, mammary glands, testes, vas deferens, seminal vesicles and prostate

Operating systems (neuroendocrine system): the management of all the organisms’ subsystem and it is in charge of the coordination and operation of all subsystems which incorporated all the behavioral output of the fitness strategy, the operating system includes autonomic and cognitive systems:

  • Endocrine system: communication within the body using hormones made by endocrine glands such as the hypothalamus, pituitary gland, pineal body or pineal gland, thyroid, parathyroid and adrenals, i.e. adrenal glands
  • Nervous system: collecting, transferring and processing information with brain, spinal cord and peripheral nervous system.

Other systems of distribution of energy, oxygen and maintenance and repair systems:

  • Cardiovascular or Circulatory system: pumping and channeling blood to and from the body and lungs with heart, blood and blood vessels.
  • Respiratory system: the organs used for breathing, the pharynx, larynx, bronchi, lungs and diaphragm
  • Immune system: protects the organism from foreign bodies
  • Lymphatic system: structures involved in the transfer of lymph between tissues and the blood stream; includes the lymph and the nodes and vessels. The lymphatic system includes functions including immune responses and development of antibodies.
  • Integumentary system: skin, hair, fat, and nails.
The cognitive system the facilitator and operator of the locomotion which is the determine factor of the fitness strategies

The cognitive system (“cognition”) has two main subsystems: system of controlled cognition for motile decisions and system of rudimentary cognition for automation of biomechanical sequences as part of locomotion and movement and for immediate and instinctual responses:

The cognition is the operating system of biological systems: it is based on neurological tissue of modules as hardware and it is measured by the input, processing and output capacity and by the velocity of data flow and threading which are determined by the arrangement, amount, type and bandwidth of neurons, synaptic connections, wiring and brain modules as well as the pathways in which information flow.

The cognition evolved to answer the needs of the feeding strategy and the preservation of metastability by operating the biomechanics modules in accordance to motile decisions that and to execute the locomotion in accordance to the fitness strategy.

Cognitive abilities are brain-based skills intended to carry out any task from the simplest to the most complex:

They have more to do with the mechanisms of how we operate via logic and how we learn: remember tactics, solving problems, and pay attention that can be compared to wisdom, rather than relay on a database of tactics and symbolic triggers that are based on memorizing experiences and theoretical non-personal experience which can be compared to knowledge.

The performance of the cognition will be determined by the environmental challenges and opportunities that drove their development: the structural complexity of the environment, the distribution, location and properties of objects of energy that are suitable for their current digestive system, the sophistication of the species biomechanical hardware such as the motoric system, these will define the type of cognitive calculations that are needed to support the execution of the locomotion, the type of EROEI strategy of passivity (relayed less on cognitive power) or agility (demands more cognitive power especially when the agility pushed to the extremes of speed and velocity), inherit brain modules and cognitive systems, intraspecies and interspecies interactions (social and threats) and many more other determining factors.

The cognitive initiation, control and operation of locomotion by an intentional agent with motile objectives, is only possible by using energetic expenditure from an internally stored stock of energy. The energetic stock is metabolized and distributed to the motoric system where it is utilized for performing biomechanics sequences which results in mobilization and traveling for achieving motile objectives (move away from a current location (point A) to another location (point B).

Locomotion is the result of motile decision to answer metastability objective (feed, drink, reproduce, survive threats and hazards etc.) and it is driven by the need to mobilize to another location where it safe, important or where consumable object of energy is located.

Agile locomotion strategy: means faster locomotion that includes faster gait speeds and rapid changes of route and utilization of trajectories and is the result of a sufficient surplus energy that is the result of positive EROEI from the feeding strategy which is sufficient enough to support all the daily activities which maintain the life of an organism including the activities involved in passing its genes to the next generation which in whole defines the species fitness strategy. Over time in incremental of generations the agile locomotion strategy can improved and maintained by focusing on prime energetic objects for growing the surplus balance by increasing the energetic input of higher density, intensity of nutrients, improving metabolism or increasing the amount of the consumed energy stocks by improving the biomechanics functions and EROEI efficiency or by improving the current motile decision making mechanism for improving the yields of the feeding strategy by enhancing the capacity and functionality of existing cognitive and physical systems and modules and by developing new ones.

Passive locomotion strategy: means slower locomotion that includes slower gait speeds and less changes of route or use of trajectories and is the result of an energy deficit resulting from environmental conditions that impose negative EROEI on the current feeding strategy due to increase in foraging time due added distance, from other added activities such as avoiding hazards and treats, as a result of increase in competition and reduction of yield due to abiotic conditions and others which render the current feeding strategy as inefficient and insufficient for supporting the previously considered regular energetic expenditure of the regular daily activities. Over time in incremental of generations the passive locomotion strategy will balance the deficit by adjusting the animal to conservation based fitness strategy based on the availability of energy by reduction of the animal own mass of energetic stock, eliminate energy expensive physical parts and modules (like the tail that is not needed when moving slow)

A passive locomotion strategy can also work to eliminate energy expensive behaviors for example socializing activities by reducing the energetic toll of fights by avoiding other species and even by changing the feeding and reproduction strategies by transforming the interspecies competition for mating, territory and food from an energy expensive and risky physical interaction into symbolic ritual of passive aggressive aggression and intimidation via virtue signaling utilizing gestures, vocals and other communication memes or by crating standards of hierarchal access classes determine by certain properties, features and means that classify each of the contenders in a certain class or status according  to a general or culturally excepted “stud magnitude” scale which measure their relative position to each other by assessing and comparing their possessions in terms of physical and behavioral assets (size, strength, shape, color, specific body part, behavioral performance etc.) or in comparison to the “standard” of the general population of the species, related to their gender and life history stage.

In order for a motile organism to survive and pass it genes, it must be able to accomplish and complete the daily cycle of energy input that performed by the locomotion and feeding strategies (which includes traveling, locating, acquiring, consuming and metabolizing objects of stored energy) with a positive and sufficient EROEI; which means that the energy output invested in locomotion and digestion must return constant surplus of energy from the daily consumption of such objects of stored energy, that is sufficient for the energetic expenditures of all other daily activities.

The locomotion strategy brings specific objects of energy that are suitable for process by the organism’s specific type of digestive system into the reach of its opening  and in accordance to the feeding strategy which determine the choice of energy object types that will be consumed.

Locomotion strategy must support this fundamental when performing a locomotion trip from point A to point B where consumable object of energy is located.

The type of locomotion of an animal may determine or be determined by its interest in a certain type of objects of energy and the distribution and location of the stocks and their certain EROEI value that is compose of multiple factors such as the object energetic intensity, density and quantity and the energetic expenditure which are involved in the processes of it acquisition compared to its metabolism EROEI  its nutritional values and the concentration and ratio of nutritional necessities in terms of the amount, variety and intensity of carbohydrate which provides metabolic work energy, lipids (fats and oils) provide stockable high intensity energy for future metabolism or for thermoregulation, proteins for growth and repair of cellular tissues, minerals and vitamins to perform hundreds of roles in biological systems such as maintain the shore up bones, heal wounds, and bolster the immune system, to convert food into energy, and repair cellular damage.

Reproduction strategies fundamentals and their dynamic feedbacks with the locomotion and feeding strategies

There are two main types of reproduction strategies (that can be described as antagonistic – meaning that when a species is reliant on one it use less of the other) that are in a direct relation with the genetic assets of an organism, means they determine by the organism’s physical brain properties and cognitive capacity which determine the spectrum and levels of behavioral strategies and instrument it can accommodate.

Two animals may have similar physical strategies (shark and orca) which are determine by the efficiency of their locomotion but the difference between their cognitive systems will determine their reproduction strategy.

These two types of strategies are referred to as K strategy and the r strategy; K strategists are referred to as “K-selected” and r strategists are referred to as “r-selected.”

All living organisms are supposed to fall somewhere on this continuum between the two extremes (r and K). Also, organisms can be differentiated from one another in terms of their relative reliance on one strategy over the other.

r ____._________._________.______.________.__________._________._________._______K

bacteria mollusks insects fish amphibians reptiles mammals primates

  • r-selection species requiring small energy investment to produce many "cheap" offspring and live in unstable environments.
  • K-selection species requiring high energy investment that produce few "expensive" offspring and live in stable environments.
K-selection apex species

A group of animals can be referred to as a species only if it reaches energetic equilibrium at any trophic position in the community of life and it will then be considered to be an outgroup species

In a non-equilibrium environment species will be in a developmental state or a state of transition and it will then be considered to be a sister group of the outgroup species until it reaches equilibrium:

Apex species

Apex carnivore consumer species can be r-selected or K-selected: is a carnivore species residing at the top of a food chain upon which no other creatures prey. Apex predators are usually defined in terms of trophic dynamics, meaning that apex-predator species occupy the highest trophic level or levels and play a crucial role in maintaining the health of their ecosystems.

Apex herbivore consumer species can only be K-selected: is defined as one only if it reaches equilibrium at the highest trophic position possible: An Apex Consumer is a non-predatory species that have no intraspecies competitors/predators and therefore position at the top of the food chain of its climax community (the carrying capacity of a biological species in an environment is at optimal population size which the environment, if the supporting condition persists, can sustain indefinitely, given the food, habitat, water, and other necessities available in the environment).

A species that reach the level of Apex Consumer/will include many of the following characteristics and features of a K-selection species (e.g. r/K selection theory):

  • The species size, weight, morphology and physiology will reach a constant static state
  • The species lifespan and longevity are extended to the maximum
  • The species as whole and most individuals will maintain consistent level of positive EROEI short-term (weekly/monthly) and long-term (yearly/lifetime).
  • Reach and maintain an optimal size for maintaining the surplus (largest size possible for an organism while maintaining the maximal state of equilibrium)
  • Energy used to make each individual is high
  • Few offspring are produced
  • Late maturity, often after a prolonged period of parental care
  • Long life expectancy
  • Individuals can reproduce more than once in their lifetime
  • Most individuals live near to the maximum lifespan

K-selected species have a relatively long life span, produce relatively few offspring, the offspring have low mortality rates and the parents provide extensive parental care.
The offspring are also relatively intelligent so that they can internalize the lessons from their parents.
Primates are the most K-selected because their young are truly helpless- they necessitate years and decades of parental care and tutelage and the parents usually only produce one offspring at a time.

The range of life histories stages, periods and developmental stages are corresponding with the survivability and longevity of the individuals of the species:

  • K strategy: long physical and cognitive developmental period – survivorship is high, most mortality later in life span
  • In between: constant mortality throughout lifespan
  • r strategy: : short physical and cognitive developmental period, high mortality early in life, low survivorship into late life span

K-selected species have to limit their body size to the optimal energetic efficiency that can be achieved by a physiological design in relation to the medium of the locomotion (liquid, branches, ground etc.) and the biomechanical tools and technics of locomotion (fins and jet propulsion in liquid, quadruple or bipedal of arboreal locomotion of vertical gripping and climbing, walking/leaping on top or swinging/ricocheting from the bottom of branches etc.).

Another considerable factor is the carrying capacity of their niche in the ecosystem in term of the energetic state and trends and their effect on consumable energetic products available for them:

For example growing in body size when the locomotion strategy is brachiation and the medium of movement is trees’ branches will eventually force the species to move to the ground due to the thermodynamic limitations of their locomotion strategy in term of EROEI and the physical limitation of the structural infrastructure of branches to support their weight (i.e. gorilla), which will effect negatively the EROEI of the species feeding strategy due to the higher energetic expenditures of quadruple knuckle-walking locomotion compare to brachiation which they will have to compensate by different strategies limited by the type, range and availability of energetic product that they can consume and metabolize:

When larger animal is not changing the diet then it will have to compensates the higher energetic needs by increasing the energetic efficiency of the current consumable products (i.e. fruits, leafs etc.) they can achieve that also by behavioral adaptation such as increasing the amount of consumable products, increasing the foraging range and investing more time in consuming, focusing on products with higher energetic intensity in the same category and in the same metabolic range (i.e. eating young leaves instead of mature leaves) and widen the range of the consumable products limited only by their physical abilities and properties (i.e. jaws, teeth etc.)

They can achieve larger size in the longer run by morphological adaption process, an adaption for increasing the metabolic energetic input capacity and EROEI of the feeding strategy by developing more energetically efficient metabolism or higher metabolic capacity per feeding session, they can also develop new strategies for walking on the ground which will improve the EROEI of the quadruple knuckle-walking locomotion by adapting a strategy that is more efficient when walking on top of surfaces instead of gripping structures such as bipedal locomotion all depends on the food sources in their habitat and their daily necessities.

They can also adopt a strategy of energetic expenditure redistribution by decreasing the energetic expenditure of other activities (socializing, sleeping etc.) by reducing the time invested in them or by eliminating them, they can also try to reduce the time involved in the process of consumption (foraging) of the current consumable products if they can develop a behavioral strategies to energetically support a process of increasing in body size for example stockpiling energetic resources when they abundant (if conditions or type of food resource deem it possible i.e. nuts and grains, tree bark and even meet in winter freeze time) and warehousing them in underground pantry or they can go through a longer term morphologic adaption for stocking metabolic energy in fat, they can develop behavioral adaption of stealing resources from others and more.

Another way to support bigger physiology is changing or expanding the metabolic focus or range to include energy sources with higher energetic intensity such as meat but that presents new challenges when the feeding strategy is changed from vegetarian (i.e. frugivore, herbivore etc.) to omnivore or carnivore diet, metabolizing meat do not need such a radical adaptation in mammals as the need for digesting high concentrated protein in the form of mammary gland milk during their initial post-birth developmental stage makes their digestive system more adequate for digesting meet and many primates are more of an omnivore as many of them include insects as a food source, and although the metabolic adaption to digest meat is possible without any physiological adaptation, getting the meat and eating the meat demands certain traits of hunting and consumption which require morphological adaption of developing the weaponry of predation or the development of new behavioral strategies to overcome physiological limitation such as hunting in groups.

For r-selected species, the body is growing much faster so the “small copies” catch up with the physical development (faster growth rate) r-selection species do not have the maximal size limitations which are based on the size of the brain (in term of volume and weight) and the energetic expenditures which are involved in it developmental stage and depending on the medium (animals living in liquid do not have the brain size limitation due to the lack of gravitational factors (i.e. whales)) and they can grow larger in mass and weight bound only by the energetically limitations of their environment and one of the advantages of larger size is that they can have more offspring which they can produce with lower amount energy invested in each.

The different strategies to achieve higher energetic input in order to support larger size are based on physical development and are usually related to the ecosystem state as the morphological adaptation of growing in mass demand a continuum of energetic surplus which is normally related to an ecosystem in stat of development or equilibrium.

Other strategies are contrary to growth and are related to energy conservation and are correlated to species in energetic deficit due to competition or other community of life factors are normally related to an ecosystem in recession due to abiotic or other environmental conditions.

The developmental limitation of a large brain in K-selection species

The larger brain that is needed in order to facilitate higher cognitive behaviors sets a cap for the size of the offspring at birth: due to a physiological barrier govern by the practical limitations which arises from the pelvis roll in locomotion, limiting the pre-birth tissue and skeletal expansion capacity to a specific size of brain which unlike other body organs needs longer time to develop the neurologic complexity and the mass involved in advanced fitness strategies and it have to come with proportional body mass to support its biological needs, which remove the option of having miniature copies.

Brain size limitations on EROEI and developmental physiology pre/post-birth

The limitation on the size of the brain at birth is governing the fitness strategy of more cognitive developed animals for maximizing the pre-birth development capacity to shorten (as physiologically possible) the post-birth period of dependency and custody. The long post-birth and pre-birth developmental process presenting a large energetic toll on the parenting adults: the energetic investment in the developmental period of the offspring is determine by the ability of the species to maintain high energetic surplus for the entire process and therefore needs energetically effective feeding and locomotion strategies to support higher levels of EROEI and long term energetic surplus.

Thermodynamic and functional mechanic limitations of large brain

Another limitation of the brain weight for surface quadruped (as most mammals are) is in the pronograde (horizontal body position) design and arrangement and distribution of the body parts between the front and the rear for optimizing the EROEI and the agility by weight equalizing and motile supporting balance: in quadrupeds the optimal design is a rectangular shape of the motor system where the limbs forming a vertical diagonals and the top of the back and the ground forming the horizontal diagonals, together with the flexible spring like spine and the triple springs systems of the limbs it is the optimal design for high performance or for optimal EROEI which is related to the gait strategy which drive the optimization of the locomotion to a certain purpose of energetic preservation due to low returns of the motile tasks (e.g. to cover long distance with the most efficient locomotion EROEI for energetic preservation as camels) or to invest high bursts of energetic output at times in order to obtain much higher energetic returns from the costly energetic expenditure of the gait, for example to accelerate fast and to be able to change direction in order to catch a high energy protein meal or to escape becoming that meal (e.g. Chita & gazelles), to maintain high speeds (i.e. stamina) for long distance (e.g. wolf & deer) etc.

The pronograde quadrupeds was designed for the minimal stable support (as a table) of an horizontal mass to center of gravity it is the optimal method for traveling on horizontal surfaces and it is easily adapted for optimizing energetic efficiency or for maximizing agility and performance and the distribution of weight between the rear and the front and the length and flexibility of the spine and limbs are key factor for the locomotion performance and EROEI of quadrupeds.

The energetic expenditure of quadruped designs are a factor of the locomotion strategy drivers and generally quadrupeds that developed proportionally longer limbs with short torsos and less flexible spine springs are better for reducing the locomotion EROEI (they compensate the limitation of a short spine spring and the lack of the balancing tail by extending the their limbs springs and reducing the size and weight of their heads) while quadrupeds shorter limbs and longer back spring are much more energetically expensive as the mussels supporting the horizontal spring have to be much bigger and stronger, but are also much more high performance and fast maneuvering oriented with the low profile and horizontal weight distribution of the long torso and long and flexible spine spring leveraging a large head and balanced by long tail.

The distribution of weight and the arrangement and length of the mechanical springs of the motor system in quadrupeds are correlated to the feeding strategy

Quadrupeds with vertically distributed rectangular profile (e.g. gazelle) form by long limbs and short and less flexible spine are energy conservation tactics for improving the locomotion EROEI when metabolizing products of lower energetic intensity (i.e. vegetation).

Horizontally distributed rectangular profile (e.g. leopard) of long and flexible spine and shorter limbs are designed for improving the feeding strategy EROEI from metabolism of higher energetic products (e.g. meat).

In most pronograde quadrupeds the head is proportional or relatively small and it is supported by horizontal neck and the muscles which hold it in position are dependent on the support of the shoulder muscles, working as a pulley system on the neck leveraged the spine and supported by the weight of the center and rear parts of the body, if the head continuously growing more mass must be installed and distributed to the rear or a longer torso and a tail must be added to leverage the added weight at the front to maintain the balance of the pronograde design usually for the purpose of maintaining agility with large head (as in Tigers).

When quadrupeds’ fitness strategy is based on big and heavy skull and growing in mass is not possible (due to phenotypic limitations, feeding strategy underlining, environmental, ecological and other factors) then another form of leveraging will developed based on leveraging the head weight with a pulley system shaped as an irregular quadrilateral shape where the rear limbs are shorter than the front ones and are vertically diagonal and the height difference is leveraged by longer spine in a slope from the front to the rear creating a triangular posture (as in giraffes to support the neck), the pulley is must be supported by weigh which achieved by unbalanced distribution of weight to the front of the body by enlarged muscular chest, shoulders and front limbs adding weigh to support the angular pulley of the spine all driving for centering the distribution of mass to the front part of the body toward above the front limbs.

An example of doing the process from rectangular quadruped to triangular we can find in the hyena with its big heavy head, that is not developed to contain large brain but for the purpose of mechanical bone-crashing pressure delivered by wide and massive jaw and supported by strong head and neck muscles. The hyena adapted their design for leveraging their large skull by short torsos and lower hind quarters, high withers and their backs slope noticeably downward toward their rumps, forelegs are high, while the hind legs are very short and their necks are thick and short creating triangular silhouette rather than rectangular as most quadruped.

But the hyenas, giraffes and other quadrupeds that moved their center of weight to the front and shaped their rear as a leverage in order to support heavy jaws or necks do not have the high energetic expenditure of supporting large computer in their skull as the apes does (i.e. chimpanzees) which put more pressure on the energetic input that is necessary to support it.

The limitations of the quadruped’s design on the maximal weight, shape and size of the head was also due to the physical limitation of the skeletal and muscular system to support increasing head weight and the maximal ability to compensate the head weight by moving more mass to the front for leveraging which eventually affect negatively the quadruped locomotion in terms of energetic efficiency, performance and even motoric functionality as a result of the growing imbalance between the front and rear part.

The process of transition from pronograde animal to orthograde (an erect or a vertical body position) animal present many physical and behavioral challenges to such transition that makes it almost unlikely that they can become fully orthograde or horizontally bipedal by transiting first to triangular posture where the back is slopping to the rear (were the spine makes the hypotenuse edge and front limbs are the opposite edge and the surface makes the adjacent edge) for that to happen an opposite process of moving the weight to the back and sloping from the rear to the front have to initially occur where the size of the head is getting smaller (e.g. bipedal dinosaurs with large heads like the t-rex started as small head animals that stand on their hind limbs to reach taller vegetation and eventually become bipedal and the spine of their quadruped early ancestors was sloping to the front and not to the back).

Our ancestors made the process of transitioning their locomotion from quadrupedalism to bipedalism directly as a phenotypic developmental strategy rather consequently because of their orthograde posture which started from their loris like ancestors locomotion strategy of clinging and climbing on vertical surfaces (tree trunks) as a result of extreme energy conservation strategy and later on maintain their orthograde posture as they transit to orthograde posture for arboreal brachiation of a gibbon like creature (due to their lack of tail which is crucial for the agile locomotion in arboreal quadrupeds such as lemurs) of perpendicular position of the spine where the neck is vertically balancing the rounded head as a ball on a poll.

The orthograde posture of our ancestors was an adaptation for arboreal brachiation and it was the main factor for the later adaptation for the terrestrial locomotion strategy of bipedalism driven by their existing perpendicular design and large head containing a large brain with processing power pushed to the extreme.

The large brain of our gibbon like ancestors was due to the high capacity of processing power that is needed for operating the mechanics of the motor system for performing extremely fast and agile brachiation in 3 dimensional environment of extreme complexity high above the ground in the rainforest’s canopy, where motile decisions are dependent on multiple streams of high volume raw data input from different sources are multithreading with multi-dimensional logic layers processing cognitive function fast enough to operate current gait while planning the rout and choreographing and synchronizing the next few steps of motile functions of point of contact for pendulum momentum and the projectile trajectories while traveling in speeds of more than 50 kilometers per hour.

Our ancestors didn’t grow big brains and skulls when they start walking on two rather they start walking on two as they were transitioning into an orthograde position suitable for ground walking utilizing their existing orthograde design adapted for arboreal brachiation (long hands, short legs, short torso) the triangular posture was imposed on them when knuckle-walking on the ground by their short hind limbs and long forelimbs and their large head was with a base centered to their spine rather than to the center of gravity consequently forming a triangular profile where the spine and neck are aligned and forming the hypotenuse edge sloping down to their hips in about 45 degrees.

The adaptation for bipedalism was more energetically cost effective and biomechanically plausible (maybe it was a cognitive strategy driven by the large size of brain to maintain itself?). Other factors also drove our ancestors to bipedalism such as the knuckle-walking position and angle of the neck and the pressure of the heavy skull on the weak neck muscles that become less developed as a result of the constant orthograde posture when hanging from branches, swinging and when sitting upright on top of branches always keeping the head and the neck center to the spine and gravity or to the center the centrifugal force (i.e. acts outward on a body moving around a center, arising from the body's inertia) when preforming a pendulum movement.

 

Example of calculating the energetic expenditures of an animal behavioral activities during one daily cycle in order to calculate its Daily EROEI and Daily energy stock balance

In order to assess the evolutionary trends in a species of organisms we can factor all the physical properties, autonomic and rudimentary and biomechanical activities partaking in the total energy expenditure of the specific behaviors which are incorporated in the fitness strategy of the organism in the context of its environment in order to produce a profile which include the animal internal energetic consumption demand in correlation to it energetic balance and in correlation to it environmental energetic stocks and supply. The first stage is to establish baseline for the organism state at a certain life history stage at a certain point in time and space; assessing its short term EROEI at the end of its base metabolic cycle (can be daily as in primates, monthly as in some sharks, yearly as some reptiles etc.) here is an example of the methods and assumptions for a daily energetic expenditures of a fictitious tailless primate using brachiation as its primary locomotion strategy living in the equatorial broadleaf rain forest:

  • Mass units: using Kilograms (kg) on planet earth at sea level different then the newton weight (1 kg unit for a weight measure equals = into 9.81 N (newton earth)) although equivalent weight and mass unit type measure often used, the conversion for N is important for calculation of energy consumption when performing locomotion.
  • Temperature units: measured in Celsius for easy presentation but for calculation kelvin units will be used (0C=~273K, 25C=[25C]+273=~298K etc.)
  • Energy unit: using kilocalorie (kcal) as the unit of energy: the small calorie or gram calorie (cal) is the approximate amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius at a pressure of one atmosphere. The large calorie or kilogram calorie (kcal) is defined in terms of the kilogram rather than the gram. It is equal to 1,000 small calories per 1 kilocalorie.
  • Daily cycle: a 24 hours cycle starts and ends at sunrise (e.g. in equatorial region the sun rise around 6:00AM: in that region the 24 hours cycle starts at 6:00AM and ends at 5:59AM the next morning).
  • Behavioral categories: foraging, eating, socializing, playing, resting, sleeping, reproduction etc.
  • Daily activities schedule (the time in the day and span of behavioral categories): includes the schedule and timespan invested in all the regular activities performed during one day and one night (such as foraging, eating, socializing, taking care of others, playing, resting, sleeping etc.)
  • Energetic baseline output: the sum of all energetic expenditure invested in autonomic bodily functions and behaviors that occur in a living organism (without conscious control) such as thermoregulation (the process of regulating the core temperature of the organism by generation, preservation and discharging of heat), metabolism for anabolic and catabolic activities that maintain the energetic balance of animals etc.
  • Behavior gross energetic output (per unit of time): the total amount of calories spent during a unit of time (one second/minute/hour) of activity and it is including the sum of all the energy invested in the systems that are actively participating in such activities (motoric systems, neurovascular systems etc.) and the energetic baseline output of all the autonomic and rudimentary bodily systems that are active during the behavioral activity, correlated and adjusted to a median temperature in the animal environment (e.g. 25C°, 35C°, 10C°, etc.), humidity and radiation intensity which are all part of the factors that are required in order to calculate the heating/cooling expenditures.
  • Daily gross energetic output (per behavior per day): The sum of the gross energy (kcal) invested in one category of behavioral l activity during 1 daily cycle
  • Total daily energetic output (per day for all activities): the sum of all the gross energetic expenditures (kcal) invested in of all behaviors performed during 1 daily cycle
  • Energetic input: the total amount of energy (Kcal) that was consumed digested and metabolized during 1 daily cycle.
  • Gross energetic stock: the total amount of energy (Kcal) that is stocked in the mass of an organism
  • Work energy stock: the amount of energy that is ready for the disposal by the organism for the purpose of executing and supporting behavioral and baseline activities
  • Daily EROEI value: the total amount of energy input in 1 daily cycle less the total daily energetic output during that cycle.
Setting energetic intensity scale and values per 1 hour of behavioral activity (adjusted to a median temperature in the animal environment of 25C°:
  • 1/Baseline/minimal intensity (Basal body temperature (BBT)): is the lowest body temperature attained during sleeping excluding initial digestive activities (50Kcal/hour)
  • 2/low intensity: in the example below I averaged all the intensity levels of activities involved in the behavioral categories of eating and socializing to 100Kcal/hour:
    • Rest/Stationary awakens state: (75Kcal/hour) measured immediately after awakening and before any physical activity has been undertaken excluding initial digestive activities.
    • Eating: (100Kcal/hour) food consumption and initial digestive activities during a mostly stationary state.
    • Slow locomotion: (125Kcal/hour) non-ricochetal brachiation (swinging) (or tailed primate walking on branches)
    • Low overheating/overcooling: ±2.5-5C° from median temp (125Kcal/hour)
  • 3/medium intensity: (200Kcal/hour) intensity level of activities involved in the behavioral category of foraging in the example bellow:
    • Cruising speed locomotion: low to medium speed of ricochetal brachiation (or tailed primate running on top of branches)
    • Medium overheating/overcooling: ±5-10C° from median temp
  • 4/high intensity: (300Kcal/hour) not applicable in the example bellow
    • Fast locomotion: medium to high speed of ricochetal brachiation (or tailed primate performing a series of sprinting for long distance leaps on top of branches)
    • High overheating/overcooling: ±10-20C° from median temp
  • 5/maximum intensity: (500Kcal/hour) not applicable in the example below
  • Fight/flight locomotion: include physical attacks and/or acrobatic high speed ricochetal brachiation when chasing or being chased (or tailed primate constantly sprinting, leaping and changing direction on top of branches in a series of short and long distance leaps)
  • Hypothermia/hyperthermia: over ±20C° from median temp
Calculating daily cycle energetic expenditures:

Observations
  • In order for the fictitious primate to maintain daily equalized EROEI it needs to consume 2,400Kcal/day in median temperature of 25C°.
  • The amount of energy invested in the consumption of 2,400Kcal daily is 1,400Kcal which includes the energetic expenditures of the behavioral activities of foraging trips and eating.
  • The amount of time invested in the consumption of 2,400Kcal daily is 8 hours which includes the span of the behavioral activities of foraging trips and eating.
  • The amount of energy invested in other daily behaviors is 400Kcal which includes the energetic expenditures of the behavioral activities of socializing.
  • The amount of time invested in other daily behaviors is 4 hours which includes the span of the behavioral activities of socializing.
  • The amount of energy invested in sleeping is 600Kcal which includes the energetic expenditures of the behavioral activities of socializing.
  • The amount of time invested in sleeping is 12 hours which includes the span of the behavioral activities of socializing.
Conclusions
  • Any decrease in the EROEI of the consumption activities due to change in the availability, distribution, range or the energetic value of the food sources due to change in abiotic factors, intraspecies, interspecies conditions etc., will increase the amount of time and energetic expenditure invested in consumption on behalf of the other daily cycle behavioral activities such as socializing and sleeping.
  • Any increase in the daily energetic expenditures due to change in temperatures or precipitation will increase the amount energetic expenditure invested in thermoregulation or in trips for maintaining dehydration will demand more consumption of energy daily and will result in an increase in the amount of time and energetic expenditure invested in consumption on behalf of all other daily cycle activities.
  • Any introduction of energetically expensive behavioral activities such as fight/flight demand an increase in the amount of time and energetic expenditure invested in consumption on behalf of the other daily behavioral activities such as socializing and sleeping (fight/flight activities can also result in injury which will affect the daily EROEI by demanding investment of energy and resting time for the recovery process)

Each change in the daily energetic balance and EROEI that will persist due to one, some or all of the above conclusion (as well as many other unmentioned factors that may affect the energetic balance in a negative or positive way), will affect the fitness of an animal and depending on the rate of escalation of the conditions that negatively affect the daily energetic balance and EROEI may ignite a change in the fitness strategy. A species can maximize its energetic equilibrium without physical changes but only for a short term by reducing its energy output in the form of time, in some behavioral activities and shifting it into activities involving in energetic consumption. There are other methods of increasing the energetic input and they are dependent on many colluding biological, cognitive and environmental factors which enabling or restricting behavioral adaption technics.

 

Aggression a key driver of evolutionary adaptation as a process of arm-race adaption (predator and prey) and as a responses to the introduction of threats into specie’s habitat

Changes in the energetic balance in a species of animal may suggest a beginning of an evolutionary adaptation process to regain energetic balance such balance can be affected negatively by the introduction of new condition.

Like any other counter-fitness factors that are introduced into a species environment the arrival of an attacker can ignite evolutionary adaptation in the attacked which will take a rout of behavioral or physiological adaptation or both routs each of them possess a spectrum of possible developmental morphological directions and many methods for responding to a newly arrived aggressor; (determine by the genotypic and phenotypic assets of the attacked species) in the short term the response must be carried by existing assets and in the long term by development of more specialized assets and depending on the phenotypic range and genotypic potential of the physical and cognitive assets and traits the immediate responses that are based on existing assets are representing the spectrum of potential immediate responses that the successful ones will ignite a developmental processes to amplified the successful strategy, the responses can be mostly relay on one of the two main categories or in between:

Physical response for new threat if successful can indicate the emergence of a morphological adaptation: utilizing existing phenotypic assets in the form of phenotypic arsenal of weapons or features that can potentially be used as weapons or defense (size, weight, strength of mussels, fangs, claws, thick skin, poison etc.) that can be immediately put use or can be easily modify within few generation of sexual selection.:

Cognitive response for new threat if successful can indicate the emergence of cognitive adaptation: utilizing existing and potential cognitive assets in the form of an arsenal of behavioral traits and tactics such as organizing in groups (social organization) outsmart aggressors etc.

There are different behavioral options for responding to a threat can be in the category of fight or flight, the two amygdala based responses and their derivatives (intimidation, hiding, migrating etc.). The developmental level of the attacked will determine if the immediate response which will be predominantly relay on the most developed asset either cognitive or physiological:

Fight – confronting threat with aggression

Individualistic based strategy for responding with fight for new threat will be mostly relay on physical traits: to be able to defend means to have the physical properties and arsenal of physical weapons (fangs, claws, large and strong mussels, thick skin, poison etc.) equal to the threat or fighting tactics that can compensate for inferior physicality all have to be fully developed and operational at the time when the new threat arrives or else to be able to develop or enhance existing phenotypic weapons before their species is decimated by the predator.
Basing the fight strategy on phenotypic physiological strategies is in the roots of solitary animals especially the ones that are of predatory nature or which their reproduction strategy force them into fierce fights, sometimes to death for the opportunity to reproduce or to confront predators on regular bases especially when parenting etc.
An adaptation process for developing phenotypic weapons for fight can also be triggered by the most common type of fight – the fight between male of the same species for the opportunity to breed with the specie’s females or to defend a territory with females and juvenile members of their species (dimorphism; where the males evolved to have larger size and weapons that makes their phenotypic physiology (as well as their behavioral traits) different then of the females’) or protecting a territory of resources, which are all depended on solitary male ability to survive by itself and fending from predators until it wins a vicious fight with another male of its own species for the opportunity to breed which many times come with a territory that it need to defend from contester males and with a duty of defending a group of females and offspring from predators.
Solitary animals are usually more in-tune with the arm race with their own kin or with existing prey or predators, and as they can only rely on themselves and with generation they have to evolve and develop technological advantage to counter their attacker or rival technology or they parish, limited by the availability of environmental energetic products and conditions and by their ability to maintain positive energetic balance and EROEI which is crucial for developmental evolution.

Group based strategy for responding with fight for new threat will be mostly relay on cognitive traits: means the members of the species are organized in groups prior to the arrival of the aggressor or have the cognitive capacity to form groups in order to gain the advantage of the combined mass, strength and stamina in order to attack or defend themselves.
There are different behavioral adaptations which are the premises on which aggression groups are formed for the purpose of defending or attacking and they are dependent on the premises of which aggression based groups are formed:

  • Hunting: the premise for attacking members of other species for the purpose of food consumption.
  • Cannibalism: the premise for attacking members of own species for the purpose of food consumption.
  • Defending own life: the premise for defending from members of your own species or other species for the purpose of surviving in the short term from becoming the prey of an attacker.
  • Defending resources: the premise for defending from members of your own species or other species for the purpose of surviving in the long term by not succumbing to energetically deficit due to the unavailability of the lost resources etc.
Flight – escaping confrontation:

Individualistic based response for flight will be mostly relay on physical traits: to be able to escape means to have certain phenotypic traits (light weight, long legs, strong muscles, wings, strong hind legs for jumping etc.) at the time when the new threat arrives, or to be able to develop or enhance existing traits before their whole species is decimated by the predator.

Other mostly individualistic strategies for dealing with aggression are avoiding confrontation by staying out of sight, out reach, or by being energetically worthless by adopting morphological or behavioral strategy which intended for lowering its energetic value, increase the energetic cost of acquisition and consumption resulting in negative EROEI for the attacker in other words the energy invested by a predator in acquiring and consuming the animal is higher than the energetic return from its prey. Animals can avoid being attacked by adopting various tactics and strategies which reduce the predator EROEI (by reduce mass, vast distribution, stamina etc.), can cause an energetic or physical mutilation to an attacker (by developing a defense system such as spikes, shell, poison etc.), that can increase the energetic expenditures of foraging and locating them by predator (such as living underground, camouflage, becoming nocturnal etc.) all of the needs a major phenotypic adaptations process to begin with and constant fine tuning of their strategies in accordance to their attackers development in the long run.

Group based response of flight will be mostly relay on physical traits: basing the survivability on the flight strategy which includes phenotypic physiological strategies is in the roots of group animals especially the ones that their physical properties are based on a less energetically efficient digestive systems due to the lower energetic values and the high energetic expenditures involved in the digestive process and metabolism of vegetation mater, or if their size and power are inferior to that of their predator and that their reproduction strategy do not include physical fights for mating (ritualistic fight).
In order to be able to effectively respond to a new threat the members of the species are organized in groups prior to the arrival of the aggressor or have the cognitive capacity to form groups in order to gain the advantages of the numbers.
There are different behavioral adaptation that are needed in order to form groups for the purpose of escaping attackers and they are dependent on the purpose and the premises of which such groups are formed which are utilizing or enjoying the advantages of some of the following tactics:

  • Dilution effect: animals living in a group "dilute" their risk of attack, each individual being just one of many, group provides benefits to the individual rather than to the group as a whole, which becomes more conspicuous as it becomes larger (e.g. the shoaling of fish).
  • Positioning: seeking a central position in a group to reduce the individual's risk and to stay out of the area within the group in which the individual is more likely to be attacked by a predator. The center of the group has the lowest domain of danger, so animals will constantly strive to gain this position.
  • Improved vigilance: groups are able to detect predators sooner than solitary individuals. For many predators, success depends on surprise. If the prey is alerted early in an attack, they have an improved chance of escape.
  • Confusion: Individuals living in large groups may be safer from attack because the predator may be confused by the multiple individuals constantly changing positions, moving around and crossing the predator line of view, and as the group moves, the predator has greater difficulty targeting an individual prey animal.

Obviously more opportunistic species with wider genotypic range of phenotypic arsenal of physical traits, metabolic gamut and behavioral strategies have higher spectrum of abilities to possibly adapt to new conditions than more specialized spices that are centering their fitness strategy on relying on specific traits consequently narrowing their phenotype for specific ecological niche which ultimately leading to a bottleneck or a threshold from which adaptation becomes impossible.

Aggression in non-predatory species are a direct or indirect derivative of environmental condition and it is one of the main drivers of phenotypic evolution

Aggression is the most counter fitness factor as it represents an energetic burden (that is comparable for extreme abiotic condition and extreme recession of ecosystems) in the heavy toll it presents not only on the energetic balance and EROEI of the individuals of a species, but on the fundamental premises of survivability of staying alive and reproduce, aggression have to be taken in consideration in every adaptation which meant to improve the fitness, aggression is one of the main threats for fitness.

Aggression as one of the important evolutionary drivers

The development of fitness strategies are always in consideration with the premise of aggression as the determining factor in the evolution of all species.

Aggression influences all other fitness strategies some are derivatives of dealing with aggression: such as defending from aggression, hiding from aggression, avoiding aggression and escaping from aggression, while other are strategies of utilizing aggression for achieving energy and reproduction.

Aggression is either the secondary or the main driver for fitness strategies in all of the predatory non-predatory species

Aggression is executed for many reasons and there are different levels of aggression executed to achieve a certain functional and operational outcome:

Killing physically or energetically: for the purpose of resources acquisition that can be the flesh or physical resources in the possession or in the access of the attacked such as depriving them from food sources in a territory, food sources acquired or in the acquisition of the attacked and for reproduction opportunity (e.g. a lion killing leopard for its prey or taking over a pride for resources and reproduction)

Wounding/crippling physically or energetically: for the purpose of breaking up an attack (defense) or for the purpose of defeating in order to depriving the attacked from access to resources and reproduction opportunities (e.g. a lion chase the previous patriarch from its pride and territory)

Intimidating: utilizing passive aggressiveness by a display of power (e.g. individual mass, size, strength, or weaponry or by ganging in groups) or active aggression displays of preforming tactics of attack and restricted display of violence, or by limited acts of violence for the purpose of exampling individuals for creating systems of laws of punishments of individuals for purpose of depriving others from access to resources and reproduction opportunities or for forcing them to share the resources they possess with minimal resistance.

Forms of aggression based strategies

All the above forms of aggression may have different levels of short terms impact on the survivability of an animal (e.g. death, injury or banishment) but all levels of aggression are equalize in their impact of longer term on the survivability of individuals, groups and species due to the energetically toll inflicted on the attacked by the diminishing of their fitness (starving, death from injury, disruption of reproduction etc.) which ultimately jeopardize the longer term survivability of the species and reproduction possibility so all levels of aggression can all be considered as counter fitness in their ultimate results on the attacked.

There are two categories of group organized aggression (not considering the intraspecies aggression between individualistic males for the opportunity to become a single Alpha male and breed), between species and within a species and they represents two very different types of fitness strategies based on organization of individuals aggressive or defensive groups and for the group tactics and strategies they utilizing to achieve their purposes:

Interspecies aggression driven and driving fitness strategies:
  • Interspecies attack group: group that is organized for the purpose of attacking members of other species
  • Intraspecies defense group: group that is organized for the purpose of defending themselves against aggression executed by members of another species
Intraspecies aggression driven and driving fitness strategies:
  • Intraspecies attack group: group that is organized for the purpose of attacking members of its own species
  • Interspecies defense group: group that is organized for the purpose of defending themselves against aggression executed by members of another species

Most of the animals are organized internally in accordance to interspecies factors with the normal predator and prey arms race but a small number of species is utilizing to a certain extent, the fitness strategy that is based on intraspecies aggression and only two animals today are basing their social organization on intraspecies aggression as the driver for forming a group.

When answering aggression with aggression both the defender and the attacker have to utilize aggression as their methodology that may differ in tactic.

Fitness strategies to oppose predation which are based on confluence of the fight and the flight strategies with combined physical and behavioral tactics which are implemented dynamically in accordance to specific situations (i.e. fight when you can win or flight if you can’t), signaled the path for the evolution of higher levels of logic where optimized and adjusted sets of tactics are deployed in correlation and in accordance to each particular or circumstantial requirement in the most energetically efficient method.

From visceral motility to logical motility

Behavioral responses are determine by cognitive assets Evolution is a linear process when it comes to morphological changes and exponential development when it comes to cognitive development with laws limiting and governing the type of cognitive fitness strategies that are available for the specimens

Epitaph

Part 1: premises:

1.1   You believe you are aware of reality but you are not.
The movie that you watched in the past decades was the usual suspect:
  • Directed by "Keyser Soze"
  • Produced by "Kobayashi"
  • And played by "Verbal Knits"
The sequel will be released very soon to home theaters very close to you:
  • Directed by "Verbal Knits"
  • Produced by the “George Brothers” (Orwell & Romero)
  • And played by "Keyser Sozes"
1.2   Predictions and analyses of reality are no more than opinions and not a scientific observation.
Analysis and its resulting predictions are like prophesy: measured by the accuracy of the prediction’s timetable, magnitude and aftermath: the actualities of all of the measures of the prophesied occurrences are what validate or null prophesy and not the presented fundamentals which assuring the occurrence of such event (see Paul R. Ehrlich’s bet).
Prophecy is an unscientific way of guessing the future based on a gut feeling and so is any other prediction based on objective observation of human made phenomena’s.
1.3   Educated predictions are as valid as the uneducated prophesies of religious prophets.
Any prediction can be categorized as prophecy: even scientific models representing a spectrum of conditional scenarios based on series of identified factors that if materialized will facilitate a tipping point representing a switch that will shift the scenarios in one way or another to predict a set of possibilities and probabilities; as the members of the Club of Rome did when they accurately identified spectrum of possible scenarios and their responsible positive and negative feedback and switches, back in 1972 with revisions fine tuning the scenarios every decade or so. I will argue (and by that I mean I have an overwhelming amount of supporting models and references based only on empirical data from scientific disciplines and domains that are based solely on physical evidences, empirical laws and “Richard Feynman’s type” of research practices):
That the members of the Club of Rome and all of the other individuals who producing futuristic scenarios based on empirical models for analysis of any type of man-made phenomena are all wrong, their models may be based on real facts and their scenario’s spectrum may be plausible or even probable – but they are all wrong in their observations and predictions and most and worst of all: Their conclusions and discussions are wrong.
1.4   The differences between reality and documented observation of perceived reality
Any man-made model based analyses are missing the most important factor in modeling human’s based phenomena: whether these phenomena’s are affecting the natural world (changes in the climate, nuclear radiation in the Pacific and all other ecological and humanitarian disasters) or affecting the fabric of sociocultural systems (wars, terror, health, trade, energy etc.):
  • Any model intended to analyze human’s generated phenomena is null without the tendencies of the human mind as the context and human behaviors as the manifesting factors.
  • The human mind is the gateway of any observations where attention and perception fundamentally defines the quality of raw data captured and memorized, and where processing capabilities which are based on functional tendencies (inherit and acquired) will fundamentally determine the behavioral output in the form of communication and actions and thus defining the mindset of individuals.
  • There are different types of mindsets which have distinct methods of input, processing and output and thus mindsets which are made of a lump of brain tissue inside the skulls of individuals are the engine behind all human generated phenomena’s.
  • The human mind is the reason for all the human generated phenomena’s: without the apparatus of mindsets’ causality all models, analysis, predictions and conclusions are null.

Part 2: what you believe is reality is no more than out of context opinions

Economics, politics, education, sociocultural and all other man-made and man-named domains are fictional instruments meant for the sole purpose of facilitating and controlling massive scale operation of resources exploitation by many individuals organized in groups in order to transfer their intrinsic value to the hands of minuscule number of individuals. Although many of you probably understand it on some level, what all of you are lacking is the context of human tendencies as the apparatuses for all human activities and human made phenomena’s.
2.1   Context is king
Context is king for any observation but attention for details and perception of context, are two contrasting traits in the vast majority of the population: Without context the details no matter how many of them are perceived and memorized by an observer, will be floating in isolated biased theories without the order of larger context; identification of recurrent patterns is the toolkit of out of context “details’ collectors” for making sense of declared and imposed out of context disciplinary systems made of fabricated or distorted ideological domains that suit the interest of the system, context is the organizer of systems of details and not the other way around.
The obsessive identification, documentation and reporting of recurrent patterns via “market” , “political”, “sociocultural” and any other analyses of disciplinary domains are pathological compulsive obsessive behaviors which form COMFORTABLE DENIAL OF RESPONSIBILITY: Distracting the mind of the preachers and the minds of their choir from the real conversations on the fundamental questions you, the “aware” should ask yourself.

Part 3: You are missing the context of human tendencies in order for understanding what is really going on

3.1  The context of human tendencies is the upmost critical sets of rules and factors which are absolutely crucial for understanding the true nature of the system:
That govern ALL aspects of living at every passing moment of existence and the entire life histories of ALL the individual primates, collectively defined as “homo sapience” and; All of the documented accumulation of all life histories of all primates throughout the generation defined as “History”: Your life histories and your view of your predecessors history is all part of the system of organization that you were born into which is behind any lingual and abstract thought in your brain at every given moment orchestrating every emotional fluctuation you experiencing and any decision you are making and all action you are taking.
Without understanding the role of human tendencies in every interaction and any transaction between individuals and collectives you will never understand how the “system” really works and how it always ends, and most of all you will not be able recognize ahead of time the point of no return which marks the beginning of the swift endgame, long after the passing of the point in time when the gates of hopes for a different future are closed and locked.
3.2  You do not recognize the systematic symptoms of our main system of organization (“civilization”) by the true nature of its functions
Civilization was created, organized and maintained by dynasties for the sole purpose of serving few individuals on behalf of and on the account of all others. Civilization is the name of a system which enables a small hierarchical organization of few individuals to organize large number of individual in well classified groups and populous in order to coordinate an increasing scale of well classified activities that are not beneficial for the individuals performing it but are always beneficial for the dynasty.
You do not acknowledge that civilization and all of its subsystems are always serving the fundamental autocratic purpose of specific group of individuals.
3.3  You address the complex systematic symptoms of human-made phenomena and not their simple causes
  • The stewards (presidents, CEO’s, generals, university deans, priests etc.) at the top of any pyramid of any disciplinary system of autocratic ideology are minions of one dynasty or another or a strategically organized alliance of dynasties.
  • Dynasties composed of owners and stakeholders in series of periodic alliances between few individuals under the lead of one individual intended to obtain, maintain and further the dominance ambitions of the leader and its alliance members.
  • The markets as any other sociocultural domain are not manipulated by their stewards: they are ideological systems that work exactly as intended.
  • The markets and all other sociocultural domains have been created and are operating to manipulate you by their founders, owners and sole beneficiaries: the dynasties and their minions.
  • The stewards are solely serving the interest of the dynasties: they are the facilitators of the dynasties’ policies intended to achieve short term tactical objectives as part of longer term plan containing a series of strategic goals representing step-ups in the dynasty’s level of dominance.
  • The ideological systems of the different sociocultural domains are the engine of civilizations which is the container for all human made phenomena and the manifestation of human tendencies.
  • All of the human made phenomena’s are the direct manifestation of the mindset of the creators and facilitator of civilization:
  • The creator of civilizations is a very specific mindset which holds the potential for the emergence and persistence of dynasties and their civilizations and is 100% responsible for the corresponding manifestations of all human made phenomena.
You do not recognize that the complex systematic symptoms are the result of a simple cause: a specific type of mindset.
3.4   You do not acknowledge that civilization and all of its subsystems are always serving the fundamental autocratic purpose of specific group of few individuals.
3.5   You do not recognize that the complex systematic symptoms are the result of a specific type of mindset:
Because you don’t know the real chain of events that led us to develop a mindset that produce such social organization that is fundamentally destructive to its participants and all life on planet earth. Our true evolutionary story is the key to understand the currently dominating mindsets which produce civilizations.

Part 4: A brief description of the current system you are living in

4.1  The properties of the different engines of civilization in the context of functionality and purpose:
The autocratic systems of civilization have two main fronts under multiple euphemistically titled practices and disciplines:
Internal affairs:
Of intimidation, harassment and punishment as measures for controlling and coordinating individuals and groups by a dynasty, for the purpose of acquisition, stockpiling, managing and securing human resources (influence) and physical resources (wealth) in a geographical region declared by a dynasty as the dynasty territory in which influential activities are facilitated by the dynasty’s minions for the SOLE purpose of serving the goals of a dynasty.
Foreign affairs:
Of utilization and mobilization of individuals and groups controlled by a dynasty (via internal affairs) as measures for intimidation, harassment and punishment of individuals and groups in geographical regions that are not under the control of said dynasty or are controlled by another dynasty for the purpose of territory acquisition for the purpose of plundering, importing and stockpiling the resources in geographical regions controlled by the dynasty’s or by their minions for the SOLE use of a dynasty.
The dynasties only measures of success are the magnitude and success of their activities:
  • Wealth: the amount of the accumulated resources from the plunder.
  • Domination and influence:  the territorial reach and the size and effectiveness of the groups of subjects and subjugated they have managed to organize in classes and mobilize for their operations for the purpose of:
  • Resources acquisition and securing – by utilizing organized groups of aggressors to enforce obedience on all groups of subjects and subjugated in the controlled territory (police) and to acquire new territories and to inflict submission on the others inhabiting the regions outside the territory (armies)
  • Resources exploitation and accumulation – by utilizing organized groups of workforce to extract (mining and agriculture), produce (engineering and manufacturing), stockpile and transport (warehousing and shipping).
  • Resources management and distribution – by utilizing organized groups of aggressors to enforce the compliance of the subjects and subjugated to the regular confiscation of portions of their personal accumulated resources (taxing) and organized groups of bureaucrats for the unequal distribution of the confiscated resources (banking and trade):
    • A substantial portion of the confiscated resources goes to support the dynasty’s domination and influence operation
    • The minimal portion of the confiscated resources that is sufficient for sustaining or improving the different workforces operations and wellbeing
    • The rest of the portion goes to the possession of the dynasties and their minions
4.2  To summarize:
  • The dynasties wealth and domination are determined by the success of the methods and practices they utilized in order to produce and accumulate more wealth and dominance then other dynasties.
  • The dynasties wealth and domination is the only measure that determines their position and influence in the dynasties exclusive fight club.
  • Their position in the exclusive fight club is the sole premise for all of their activities.
4.3  To acknowledge:
The success of the competition for resources between regional and global dynasties is not measured by the collateral damage to the environment or by the level of physical, emotional, pathological and genetic damage they inflict to the populations of homo sapience that were unfortunate to live at the wrong place in the wrong time and to interact with them.

Part 5: what is really going on

5.1  Political Cannibalism (PC) is the real essence of “humanity” and the predicaments of our current system of civilization
Economics, politics, indoctrinated scientific domains and all other ideologies are no more than symptoms of the true apocalypse that is unfolding in an exponential rate in the minds of the vast majority of individuals identified as “homo sapience” – a collateral madness:
A genetically inherit mindset contain a spectrum of pathological tendencies materializing in psychological conditions of all sorts that can be easily irritated into existence via psychological manipulations based on levels of intimidation and punishment to produce specific behavioral manifestations.
5.2  It was achieved incrementally overtime by first expanding the spectrum of socially accepted behaviors and physical traits (norms) by enforcing toleration (PC) to include “formally” considered abnormal behaviors and traits that are either:
  • Productive or beneficial for the dynasty's exploitation and wealth accumulation
  • Productive or beneficial for the dynasty's domination:
Seems as counterproductive to promote abnormal behaviors, but it is by far the most productive (with very small investments) operations with unbelievable EROEI: Just by programing the human resource with triggers that are then easily exploited via the correct stimulus and form groups of [programed] interests that can be now be maneuvered and controlled as a well-coordinated swarm (fish-ball) of individuals which are then unleashed on other groups (under the protection of the Political Cannibalism mercenaries agencies) they will trigger different types of swarms (such as swarm of feminist fish: feminism is equality to participate in opportunistic cannibalism; normalize via political cannibalism and promote aggressive cannibalistic behaviors in woman so they can join the male exclusive fight club) and unleashed them on you and others until you conform to their promoted shade of abnormality or lose your viability:
And those are the engines of civilization the agents of fear, terror and confusion controlling your daily conversation and capturing your attention by their fear mongering propaganda from every talking empty head with access to the internet.
All are tactical maneuvers to support and enhance the dynasty’s strategic goals of domination and exploitation. When the abnormal behaviors are normalized and consequently improves the yield and EROEI of the dynasty’s hierarchical machine of exploitation and domination enabled them to achieve enough wealth and dominance, they then move to next step of their ambition.
5.3  What are the behaviors that are “abnormalize” by the ones control the sexual selection?
All the normal tendencies that are manifested in behaviors that are: Counterproductive, unproductive or inefficient for the dynasty’s exploitation efforts and domination ambitions.
By slowly shifting the attention of generation into the abnormal spectrum they construct the current social organization and shifted the mindset of individuals and collective from the normal to the needed abnormal utilizing the following method repeatedly over the ages:
  • Normalizing abnormalities in behavioral traits by implementing rewords mechanisms for willing adopters (conformists) and super rewords for talented adopters with the most desirable traits, while rendering normal behavioral traits as abnormal by constant intimidation and “as needed” physical aggression
  • Implementing systems of intimidation and punishment and elimination for unwilling adopters (nonconformists).
  • Influencing the choices made in sexual selection utilizing evolving technologies from their talented conformists to support more complex indoctrination methods for increasing the capacity, efficiency and productivity of systems of exploitation and domination based on the principal of hierarchical organizations in classes of functionality and productivity.
  • Each periodic system of dominance was led by periodical dynasties which become more powerful than others by managing to increase their territorial reach and access to human and physical resources and/or improved the efficiency of resources acquisition and exploitation.
5.4  What are the goals of the h. sapience breeding facilities: to change the mindset of individuals
By controlling the sexual selection of your subjects you can produce more “manageable” offspring’s.
5.5  What is the objective of all the breeding farms: to conform all the colorful chicken to unified inclusive color – white and unified their minds so they can be formed into swarms (defensive fish-balls or blood-frenzied swarm of piranhas)
You need a specific mindset in order to be able to orchestrate large scale maneuvers and operations: to facilitate (enforce and fuse) collective organization, synchronization of groups’ (via handlers and financiers) for cooperation or confrontation.
5.6  The simplicity of controlling the sexual selection of masses
By controlling the daily conversation between individuals and groups (narratives); for the purpose of shifting the standard pattern of behaviors that are considered normal in a community (norms); which conditioning the attention and focus of individual to falsely recognize an unfit partner for sexual reproduction by suppressing its conflicting normal instincts via threats or punishment of social exclusion (not good for your reproduction prospects).
Welcome to the animal farm of bulls, dogs, cows, chicken and sheep: which one is your preferred pronounce? Or maybe you are all of the species and breeds depending on the facility you are in?

Part 6: Denial

6.1  Original denial was the denial of one’s own horrible, eminent and imminent murder by its own kin
6.2  The original denial was not the fear of your knowing the range or causes of certain expiration in unknown point of time in the future, rather the denial of your certain, imminent and well-known death, by your hunger and power driven cannibalistic kin.
It’s why we fall into a deep sleep stage so fast, we needed to sleep to suppress the Amygdala’s laud alarm and flashing red lights urging you to take the flight low road right now in order to save your life while preparing you for the flight via your exhausted adrenal glands. You needed the deep sleep to reduce the cortisol levels (stress) in our systems in order to sustain basic brain and bodily functionality such as focusing and digesting, we are the descendants of the most successful deniers of certain, imminent and well known for being horrible death.
The stage of deep short sleeping at nights led to the day dreaming where your mind is still semi sleeping to suppress the cortisol levels during wake times; by daydreaming away the same terrifying fears you denied last night in order to fall asleep: by painting flowers in the hands of cannibals holding butcher’s knives and by imagining yourself sleeping in the safety of a cave/cage sealed from the inside by you.
6.3  If you want to imagine how horrible and terrifying the death by cannibalism experience was watch the gang of male chimpanzees’ hunting down and devour one of their kin from their own group or a neighboring group.
If you want to understand how desperate the situation was imagine a group of chimpanzees in an enclosure with no access to food and watch the carnage starting as soon as one of the gang’s male is hungry eating each other one by one first the babies, then young males and the females and finally the gang members to the last one standing that was the most successful cannibals of all.
6.4  The modern denial has two façades depending on your mindset group:
The first one inhabiting the mind[set] of the vast majority of the population is the denial of themselves killing their kin
The second one inhabiting the mind[set] of few (including yourself?), is the denial of the others killing yours and their kin
6.5  The modern denial is the denial of the original sin of cannibalism by the cannibals and by their victims
You denial the true nature of the people around you because you know who they are and what type of mindset they possess; you see it all around you in the destruction, death and misery inflicted on all life on earth by their mindset:
By denying the majority’s mindset responsibility for the global carnage you denial your own mindset AND YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO STOP THEM!
6.6  Ideological ideas are sometimes based on more "ancient" realities:
  • “Heaven”: The lives of our lineage outgroup – the Siamangs: a peaceful, mostly frugivore (a bit of insectivore), gender equal, monogamous (mostly), acrobat “lesser” ape living up in the clouds of the lush canopy of the tropical rainforest, hundred meters above the ground, where abundance high energy food is literally growing on trees available for everyone (who can reach it) to enjoy a shot of fructose with minerals and vitamins, safe from predation of surface predators (demons) and from the few arboreal ones (flying demons?) untouched due to its mental and physical agility producing the ability to swing and ricochet (ricochetal brachiation) itself in curved and parabolic trajectories, between branches up to 15 meters away in speeds of ~50K/h.
  • “Hell”: living like chimpanzees in hierarchy of aggressive males with gang mentality where your choice is conform or die:
    • Hell” for male: If you are a male “conform” means; be part of the gang and be aggressive, murderous and abusive to deserve their respect granting you membership, have no empathy and they admire you and make you the head of an attack squad, bring more loot and murdered kin to your “male only” feasts and you’ll become their king. Male’s life in the Chimpanzee-human society is the definition of wrecking hell.
    • “Hell” for female: If you are a female “conform” means; you need do please many males to maintain your life and the life of your offspring’s, you have to especially emphasis on one that can provide protection from his friends: you breed with him to make sure that you will be protected for the next 3 years (Oxytocin – you call it love) but it’s really using the offspring to blackmail the father instincts for your own protection and supply (power), other females are competition and you do not bond with them unless you are really young or old, seduction is your strategy and way of life, extension of your longevity is your obsession (of your external physics signaling fertility via plastic surgery, cosmetics, yoga and other desperate means), mental rape is your sex life (bonding ritual) and Stockholm syndrome is your conversations (romance). Female's life in the Chimpanzee-human society is the definition of living hell.
  • “Limbo”: The life of the Bonobo: PTSD based escapism via immature play and obsessive sex to denial the looming armies of the common chimpanzee outnumbering them 20 to 1 held only by the natural beerier of the Congo River that can dry out at any time (like the walls of the civilization sanctuaries).
  • “Devil”: The mindset of the chimpanzee.
  • “God”: The chimpanzee’s schizophrenic denial with the “human” approval (reasoning) of their true nature.
  • "Happiness”: Is a state of normality, of balance of equilibrium like the state of the Siamang and its environment.
    • ”Smile”: A physical signaling of a state of normality: the relaxation of your amygdala consequently relaxing the tension of the muscles tightening the jaw (in readiness for a punch), which let it drop and creates a catenary curve (the curve that an idealized hanging chain or cable assumes under its own weight when supported only at its ends) outlined by your lips. Any other type of smile or laugh are like a yawn or a sneeze nothing more than fake participation in the constant game of aggression and stress diffusion which is part of living in the chimpanzee’s mindset-based society.
6.7  Blame the instruments and complain about their manifestation (even make some models and presentations about them) and not the mindset that is responsible for them: the instruments inventors, manufactures, distributors, consumers and users.
Denying responsibility from the mindset (with any excuse) is like blaming the gun (that shot the bullet that murdered someone) instead of prosecuting the mindset of the individuals that supplied the instrument and that aimed it at another individual (after loading it with ammo), intentionally pulling the trigger of the killing instrument, inevitably ending another individual experience of life with no sense of empathy.
6.8  The same mindset inhabits the skulls of the individuals who are responsible for the death toll and misery inflicted by their industrial instruments (killing machines of slow or quick death):
Poisoning life, changing the habitable climate of entire planet, redesigning and transforming the shared habitats render them inhabitable to all life but them, causing the annihilation of ecosystems on all of their living creatures, burning the land with wars and all other thousands, millions and billions of other mindset-made atrocities occurring every moment for ages. The same mindset supplying the mass instruments intended for mass killing; teaching them how to operate and load and transferring the responsibility of pulling the triggers to them, which inevitably ends the experience of living for many with no sense of empathy. You are denying your role as accessory to mass murder preformed against your own kin, by your own kin, guided by the individuals of your own kin which happened to be on the top of a dominance hierarchy; a system based on the cannibalistic mindset of willing and unwilling participant accessory to ending their life and the life’s of all others with no sense of empathy.

Part 7: knowing our lineage actual evolution occurrences is knowing who you are, who are “they”, what type of mindset “they” possess and what you are facing

7.1  Who we are ?
We are the accumulation of generations of sexual reproduction determined by the interaction of individual male and female of each generation in accordance to the factors and condition that governed their day to day activities during the time of their life.
7.2  You are the result of generations of sexual reproduction by natural selection (where females are willingly selecting their partners) and unnatural where males physically forced or mentally enforced sexual intercourse's where females are unwillingly reproduced (raped).
The intimate reproduction choices of females and males were the determine factor for their offspring’s genotype and their consequential phenotype spectrum (wiki: The genotype–phenotype distinction is drawn in genetics. "Genotype" is an organism's full hereditary information. "Phenotype" is an organism's actual observed properties, such as morphology, development, or behavior. This distinction is fundamental in the study of inheritance of traits and their evolution.)
Technology and tools meaning intelligence or opportunism?
-

Part 8: A new mindset destined to rule it all – the evolution of the dominant mindset

8.1  The truth is buried in the graveyards of the previous generations, with the dead brains’ of individuals who had logic, critical thinking, system thinking which were thriving to communicate facts in their conversations and published narratives.
The current human condition and its consequential predicaments emerged long before civilization emerged and was the result of an evolutionary process that went wrong and took the wrong turn; and as a result unleashed new evolutionary forces (more accurately devolutionary forces) which determine our mindset and life histories millions of years later.
8.2  A Pandora box of chaotic fitness strategies based on opportunistic adoption and adaptation of random phenotype mutations that benefit few individuals today as the benefit a specific group of apes in Africa millions of years ago:
These individuals are non-kin males who form an alliance (gang) which enabled them to conquer by force and hold by violence the top of the social hierarchy of their clan: they are the masters of the clan and they are working together as dogs breeders that cultivate the beneficial phenotype of the members of their own kind, by controlling and enforcing the sexual selection of the entire clan.
8.3  The modern gang (dynasty) dominance methodology is "breeding":
The ruling gang is a group of breeders who works together to manufacture population and populous (breeds) of a unique genotype of based on phenotype (skills and mindset) hence classes.
8.4  The modern gang (dynasty) breeding facility is civilization:
Utilizing the system of “civilization” they created human breeds with extreme manifestation of “needed” traits in their genotype based on selected and cultivated phenotype which creates over generations breeds of specialized fitness strategies similar to the extreme phenotype that can be observed in dog breeds: extreme sizes (Great Dane vs. Pomeranian), extreme body types (Dachshund vs. Pug) and extreme characters (Pit bull vs. Golden retriever).
8.5  When sexual selection is controlled by a certain mindset
8.5.1 Definition of the method of phenotype design (and consequently genotype) via orchestrated and imposed sexual selection (from wiki [mostly]):
“Dog [primate] breeding is the practice of mating selected dogs [primates] with the intent to maintain or produce specific qualities and characteristics. When dogs [primates] reproduce without such human [gang] intervention, their offsprings' characteristics are determined by natural selection, while "dog [primate] breeding" refers specifically to the artificial selection of dogs [primates], in which dogs [primates] are intentionally bred by their owners. A person who intentionally mates dogs [primates] to produce puppies [babies] is referred to as a dog [primate] breeder. Breeding relies on the science of genetics [eugenics], so the breeder with knowledge of canine [primates] genetics, health, and the intended use for the dogs attempts to breed suitable dogs [humans].” I suggest you read the whole article at Wikipedia titled “Dog breeding” and figure by yourself what are the consequences of such breeding on individual’s wellbeing, here are some quotes:
  • Some dogs [humans] have certain inheritable characteristics that can develop into a disability or disease. Canine hip dysplasia is one such condition. Some eye abnormalities, some heart conditions, and some cases of deafness have been proven to be inherited.
  • There have been extensive studies of these conditions, commonly sponsored by breed clubs [states] and dog [human] registries [governments], while specialised breed clubs [Universities] provide information of common genetic defects for their breeds. As well, special organizations, such as Orthopedic Foundation for Animals [health system], collect data and provide it to breeders.
  • Some registries, such as American Kennel [civilization] Club [USA], may include a record of the absence of certain genetic defects, known as a certification, in an individual dog’s [human’s] record. For example, the German Shepherd Dog [German human] national breed club in Germany [German government] is a registry that recognizes that hip dysplasia [cancer and other conditions] is a genetic defect for dogs [humans] of this breed. Accordingly, it requires all dogs [humans] to pass evaluation [medical assessment] for absence of hip dysplasia [cancer and other conditions] to register their progeny, and records the results in individual dog‘s [humans] pedigrees [governmental records].
  • Some scientific researchers [who are thorn between their obedience to their providers and their sympathy for the livestock] argue that advances in artificial reproduction technology for the purposes of dog [human] breeding can be helpful but also have "detrimental impacts" when overused instead of natural selection principles. These scientists [spineless conformists] call for a deeper understanding of natural selection, leading to a more naturalistic approach in dog [human] breeding [nicer kennels, bigger playgrounds and increased playtime].
  • On the basis of an analysis of data on 42,855 dachshund litters [5 billion humans], it was found that as the inbreeding coefficient increased, litter size decreased [less babies] and the percentage of stillborn [born with autistic disorder spectrum] puppies [babies] increased, thus indicating inbreeding depression. Inbreeding depression is a reduction in progeny fitness due largely to the homozygous expression of deleterious recessive mutations….”
8.5.2  The gang’s dog [human] breeds show: where you can watch “Along with breed judging and obedience, you'll discover agility dogs [humans] racing over obstacle courses, flyball teams hurdling to beat the clock, and four-footed [bipedal] athletes catching Frisbees and dancing to music”
The gang of “breeders” created extreme mindset (character) based on obedience to the masters accompanied with a spectrum of skills (jobs) and temperament (talent) that can be indoctrinated into existence (training) which plays role in the system of dominance: entertainment (Toy Poodle), entertainer (Jack Russell), free spirit (Siberian Husky), bureaucrats and marshaling (Border Collie), clown (Shih Tzu), enforcer and drover (Rottweiler), intraspecies aggressor (Pit bull), interspecies aggressor (Rhodesian Ridgeback) and more.
8.6 Human breeds like dog breeds are the manifestation of the extreme artificial breeding practices that manufactured skillsets that fits a wanted niche corresponding to the times and conditions:
Shepherding/herding dogs during the pre-industrial times, guard dogs during the middle ages, attack/work dogs during the conquests of the Roman Empire, entertainment dogs during the European renascence of autocracy etc.
All the dog breeds share the genotype with the wolf but they do not share the genotype between themselves, the wolf is their “outgroup” while they are sister groups hence breeds.
8.7  By controlling the sexual selection, the “breeders” have managed to artificially change the population’s body and mind: the dog breeds may vary in anatomy and morphology but they all share one common feature:
A mindset that is easily programmable by simple Pavlovian conditioning and submissive obedience to higher classes and instant conformation to the breeder’s authority. The breeders of dogs in kennels and the breeders of humans in civilizations are the same in methods and mindset, they cultivated fitness strategies that are not representing the individuals and group’s interest and are not according to the golden rule and completely out of balance with the web of life.
We are all experiencing the resulting consequences and the concluding events of endless generations of males-made culture that supports abnormal phenotypes which produced a specific genotypes which created a social organization based on classes of breeds each representing and performing a set of roles, services and behaviors that fit the few kings who cultivated them.
8.8  If you can tell what were the determine factors and condition that governed the sexual selection of each generation at the time and in the place that their sexual reproduction consummated, you will be able to reconstruct a firm line for the evolutionary process of the genotype and phenotype that led us to who we are
Our true evolution story didn’t start with the fossil fragments of cuddly named ancestors like “Lucy”, “Ardi”, “Little foot”, “Selam” and other early primates (collectively named “hominids” to strike an imaginary border where evolution supposedly took a turn for the “good” for what is currently defined (by all entitled primates) as “more human”.
One thing is sure: ALL of the hominids were cannibals. How do I know it? because that was what the chain of events of our linage evolutionary process have determined and that was what their ancestors (like the cannibal cuddly named “Toumai”)
8.9  What I definitely know is that 2.5 million years ago cannibalism reached its second peak as the dominant mindset in our lineage

Part 9: the biggest scientific cover-up in history of an inconvenient truth: a solid case of continuous mass scale acts of cannibalism performed by males in our direct lineage

9.1  The H. Naledi (I named it the “Bergerous cannibalous” of the new church of Rupert Murdoch formally known as National Geographic) background:
9.1.1  Homo Naledi: from the voice of the consensus (wiki) with important details highlighted:
Homo naledi is an extinct species of hominin, which anthropologists first described in 2015 and have assigned to the genus Homo. In 2013, fossil skeletons were found in South Africa's Gauteng province, in the Rising Star Cave system, part of the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site. As of 10 September 2015, fossils of at least fifteen individuals, amounting to over 1550 specimens, have been excavated from the cave.
9.1.2  At September 9 2015 National Geographic officially becomes the property of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp for a $725,000,000 bribe to the entrusted scientific organization after 127 years of being staunchly non-profit magazine and scientific organization.
The takeover started 2 years earlier when the cannibalistic crime scene was found, I urge you to research “News Corp” and Australian media mogul and climate change denier Rupert Murdoch in order to understand the total “eyeballs” reach and the domination of thoughts that the Rupert Murdoch minion gang has.
9.1.3  September 10 2015 the “Naledi” propaganda charade starts with an article on the freshly conquered media outlet of NG headlined: “This Face Changes the Human Story. But How?”
9.1.4  The article address in the address bar was: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/150910-human-evolution-change/
9.1.5  The only factual thing they did right in this propaganda piece was declaring the h naledi as being “human” like us:
I totally agree that the h naledi, h Murdoch and h Berger represent the dominant “human” mindset quite accurately
9.1.6  In a following NG propaganda piece from September 15 2015 titled: “Mystery Lingers Over Ritual Behavior of New Human Ancestor”
This is the address bar: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/150915-humans-death-burial-anthropology-Homo-naledi/ The first thing under the headline is an expensive well painted reconstruction of the events according to the propaganda made by “JON FOSTER. SOURCE: LEE BERGER, WITS” this well-made classic style oil paint was also at the end of the Sep 10 NG propaganda piece: In the paint you see a group of 3 grieving males standing on a ledge at the opening of the cave carrying the dead body of what seems to be an old female (gray fur), where underneath them at the bottom of the ledge inside the cave another male is stretching its arms toward them singling them to pass the body to him and at the front a fifth male is leading the way into the cave. While the males are willingly cooperating in the altruistic task of bringing the dead female to her last resting place, all the other clan members are watching the funeral ceremony like the curious crowd gather around traffic accidents. (The whole atmosphere and style of the paint is reminding me of the five-part series of paintings called “The Course of Empire” (created by Thomas Cole in the years 1833–36)).
9.2   H. Murdoch via it’s minion h. Berger concluding that “there is no other explanation but burial
9.2.1  In the Sep 10 propaganda piece the caption under the image of the paint voice:
An H. naledi group disposes of one of their own in Rising Star cave in this artist’s depiction. Though such advanced behavior is unknown in other primitive hominins, “there appears to be no other option for why the bones are there,” says lead scientist Lee Berger.
9.2.2  In the Sep 15 propaganda piece follow-up the caption under the image of the paint say:
In this artist’s depiction, Homo naledi disposes of its dead in South Africa’s Rising Star cave. Though such advanced behavior is unknown in other early hominins, the scientists who discovered the fossils say no other explanation makes sense.
9.3  Propaganda at the roots of ideologies
It is very important to note that many taxonomical or popular lingual definitions (Steven Pinker?) who meant to glorify our current evolutionary state (so even the most ignorant of the sappiness will fill “good” about himself as he slaughter or poison its kin and others). Nothing more is representing our collective hubris as loud and clear as the name we chose to call our “species”: Homo Sapience
  • Homo: originated from the Greek prefix meaning "the same" (opposite of Greek prefix "hetero" meaning different)
  • Sapience: originated from the Latin word meaning “wise” (that is short from the earlier lingual meaning of “sapiō” “self-declaration of wisdom” or “I am wise”)
Homo Sapience = Identically-wise (self-declared wise primate (wiser then the “Great” Apes and “for sure” wiser then the “Lesser Apes”)).
9.4  The first documented prove of repeatable cannibalistic attacks
9.4.1 Homo naledi the cannibal – placing the evidence in the right context
I think the cave is a crime scene portraying repeated acts of hominid cannibalism utilizing members of their own species as livestock that resulted in the first evidence for repeated acts of organized cannibalistic attacks by the ruling gang of males.
9.4.2  A description of the scenery AS IT WAS DISCOVERED (context):
The cave is made of a wide main entrance on the surface of the ground going down in a wide passage for about 45 meters (~150’) in ~30 degree slope leading into the first narrow passages leading into a first chamber leading to second passage leading to a second and last chamber where the remains were found:
9.4.2.1  To enter the first chamber you have to crawl and squeeze through a horizontal ~5 meter (~16.5’) passage with an average width of 25 cm (~10”).
From the entrance of the chamber you have to cross about 15 meters (~50’) of horizontal surface and then to climb about 20 meters (~65’) in ~60 degree angle to reach the second passage leading to the last chamber
9.4.2.2  The only access to the last chamber is from the first chamber through a narrow, vertically oriented "chimney" or "chute" measuring 15 meters (~40’) with an average width of 20cm (7.9”).
The fossil-bearing chamber is ∼30 meters (~100’) below the surface and ∼100 meters (~330’) away from the present, nearest entrance to the cave.
9.4.3  Note 1: Limited amount of Oxygen and long CO2 replenishment period:
In the death chamber there is no air ventilation other than the two narrow shafts that leads to the chamber of death.
9.4.4  Note 2: Pitch-black journey:
Except for the first 10 meters that are near the cave entrance the rest of the rout is pitch-black.
9.5  The crime scene (evidences):
9.5.1  Many “slender” victims mostly females and few youngsters, and even one “very slender” adult male.
9.5.2   The victims entered the cave at different occasions in different times.
9.6  The crime (circumstantial reconstruction)
The “slender” victims mostly females, and few youngsters and even one “very slender” adult male where all chased there by the males of their own kind which had the intention to eat them.
9.6.1  It was the last chamber that they could escape into when chased; one that the males could not enter with their wider shoulders.
Suggesting a smaller degree of dimorphism which suggest that a single male could not have attack a female alone with accordance to the second rule of the chimpanzee’s fight club: You do not attack unless you have numbers on your side!
Reduce chance of injury for individual attacker as factor of the total number of attacking cannibals e.g. 2 against one victim = 50% chance of injury (50% higher EROEI), 10 against one victim = 10% chance of injury (90% higher EROEI) which means the male gang system was well established in that primate.
9.6.1 The slender victims enter the chamber after at least a 100 meter chase in total darkness heavily breathing and died from CO2 poisoning within few hours
This explains why the remains of the individual were found side by side (like in a graveyard): They preferred to lay down beside other corps (which arrived there for the same reason sometimes many years prior to their arrival and died of the same reason) that at the time due to the dry and sterile conditions of the cave the past attacks victim’s bodies were probably quite preserved. This also explains why there was no evidence of cannibalism in the chamber: Not enough time before they ran out of oxygen as they were slowly losing their conciseness and die. It was much "nicer" death then being eaten alive by the males lingering outside their chamber.
9.7 Contemplating the chain of events that could have brought these individuals in to that challenging location, the scenarios that seem the most compatible are that the first chamber (not the last chamber of death) was either a shelter or a temporary livestock pantry.
Firstly, we can assume rather confidently that the option of a burial site is highly unlikely regarding h. naledi’s brain size and structure. And moreover, even if indeed they had had the sufficient mental complexity that would have enabled them to develop burial rituals, the immense challenges that this site imposed and principally the drastic size limitations (for males to reach while carrying a slender body to the vertical shaft of the death chamber) and the pitch-black darkness (no evidence of fire) revokes almost any probability that this theory might have had. It is just too far-fetched.
9.7.1 Leni Riefenstahl style propaganda
Along these Leni Riefenstahl style propaganda theories presented by h. Berger the minion of the cannibalistic dynasty of h. Murdoch, we are left with the simple scenario of escape. Something must have caused them to crawl alive into that chamber, and it must have been scarier than the dark, which means something that was threatening their lives.
9.7.2 Maybe Raymond Dart and Robert Ardrey were right?
Now, should we speculate on, what was it that had caused them to flee so deep into the cave and through such a narrow gap? So narrow that it was mostly females, elders and children who were able to pass through, along with what seems to be some exceptionally slender male hominid. The animal chasing them must have had the ability to follow them for a substantial distance into the cave, and perhaps even through the first narrow passageway (that is about 25 centimeters wide) which would have caused them to move all the way up the second chamber wall and down that second shaft (about 20 centimeters high) and into the chamber. The threat, must have also lingered for a long enough time to keep them in their hopeless sanctuary, which may suggest that these homo naledi females, youngsters and week males were a primary food source of that predator. Of course, there is the chance that they have simply been unable to get out of the chamber, although the data show that they were adaptable climbers who still had strong and long “gibbon” arms, and even if they were in fact trapped in that chamber, the amount of findings suggests that the hominids did not all enter the chamber on a sole incident, but rather one or few at a time, and that would mean that over more than one occasion a h. naledi was chased into that same cave, by something that perhaps could pass through the first 25 centimeters width passage and follow it into the first chamber, but could not have fit through the smaller 20 centimeters gap leading to the last chamber.
9.8  A new perspective on “Paleo Diet” and the real roles of males and female in our lineage
9.8.1   And here enters a crucial subject: “what were they eating?” or to be more to the point, what was available to a longer legged 1 meter tall gibbons with weak jaws and teeth that could support their nutritional needs?
According to the dental specimens and jaw structure, it appears as though the H. naledi were not adaptable carnivores, although their morphology and its resemblance to that of modern Siamang seems like one that would require a rich diet.
9.8.2  So what can you “chew on” which you can’t cook (since you didn’t yet learned how to use fire) that have all the nutrition you need in times of nutritional deficits?
The plausible answer is cannibalism: the soft meat of babies, youngsters and young females can be easily consumed even with frugivore teeth and jaws.
9.8.3 Using your own kin as livestock
We should also consider this as a case of storing livestock. Utilizing members of their species as livestock enabled them an easy transition from the tropical forests to open savannas (having your nutrition resources migrating with you, increases your fitness dramatically). The halt in physical evolution since our last common ancestor with chimpanzees until around 2-3Mya in the homo genus was in contrast to the obvious need to adapt physically in order to utilize the different types of available food sources and shelters, during the periods as the forests retreats or as they migrated to woodlands and latter savannas. This may also hold the key for the frequent amount of reproduction cycles in the human genus when comparing them to other primates.
Females in the human lineage have livestock features: The accelerated reproduction cycle like in chicken, the oversized milk tanks like in in cows, the excessive fat tissues as in farm pigs (although they didn’t live in the cold areas yet) and the cute face of a puppy in adult females (to diffuse male aggression and maybe survive another day)
9.9  The so-called “Homo” Naledi charade
When I witness the charade (press release celebrations) of the latest discoveries in South Africa producing a show that have everything for everyone like cable TV and other abnormality shows such as the x factor: auditioning young females when the factor is being skinny and the x is being attractive enough to win a crawl into a hole in front of the drooling male judges (sex deprived slimy self-declared “scientists”).
9.9.1  The "killer ape channel"
It’s got its spirituality channel were the preachers/shamans/yogis of the excavation preach the “beautiful ape” narrative and how it went on several occasions into a cave crawling in pitch-black darkness through two narrow shafts and dark chambers 100 meter long while carrying a dead body to buried its slender female or youngster dead’s and mourn them as we are the modern “compassionate” ape do while we slaughter our brothers by the thousand every day, as we did from the down of our lineage:
If you have been a cannibal since before the split of your lineage from the chimpanzee and you still a cannibal 7 million years later how in the world can you think that a small brain ancestor had the traits which makes someone “human” that you and your kin are evidently lacking.
9.9.2  The irony of being cannibal and stupid
The last thing I saw before I contacted number two in the excavation John “no balls” hawk (which used to be a good scientist) was:
A picture of a dark skin leader (the president of SA) previously oppressed by light skin homo, kissing the skull of a prehistoric victim of his cannibalistic ancestors
It was all over the place and nothing more symbolizing the cynical outlook of the current dynasties (of the R. Murdoch and his minions at “News Corp” at this particular event) than this charade that looks more like an event that takes place in the Vatican or in the other preaching facilities/monuments of the equivalent monolithic organizations of cannibalism (religion).
9.9.3  Silenced by the PC (political cannibalism) mind control police which set the trap to oppress logic: everything you say against us will be used against you (you will be called a racist and lose everything)
Try to reverse the conclusion after such contribution to the foundation of the PC madness, try to rewind the narrative of the “kind” ape and replace it with the dark truth of a vicious cannibal after that image.
9.9.4  Patenting knowledge so the dynasties minions will be the only ones with access to the truth
Since when important evidence belongs to the whole humanity is being held from the public for two years, finds its way to someone’s lips and held by bare hands. When I watched the charade I learned more about these “new celebrities” (e.g. the H. Bergerous Cannibalous and his cheerleader’s team) than I knew about their finds:
But as soon as I saw that women crawled through a hole where adult males couldn’t pass, I knew what it is all about.
Maybe now some of us will come to term with our not so “PC” origin with the new discoveries in South Africa of the naledi dominant mindset evident by the repeated acts of cannibalism performed by the species ruling gang of males as well as recognizing the same forces of the same dominant mindset million years later try to cover its own origin and silence the statuesque shattering finds: Maybe now the few that do not share that kind of mindset will finally be able to do the same move that the bonobo did:
When they branched out and left behind the fear and the abuse to the chimpanzees and their cannibalistic hierarchies, persisting by its rotating members, males who are not necessarily kin, which are promoted according to their level of aggression and abuse and their level of contribution to wealth/wellbeing of the leaders of the gang, the same gang of males that we can find at the top of every abusive hierarchy (government, military, police, any corporation, business, religion, and worst of all the education system with the rotten apple of the universities).
I think the SA specimen looked more like that
-

He looked like a pink naked longer legs gibbon with red or blue eyes (OCA2 albinism (white, as pigments matter)) with constantly growth of hair on its head and face (in males). The females where smaller and less muscular and the male had 30% more body mass then the female (extreme sexual dimorphism). Since the split from the Pan It lived in natural caves if it could find one, but ultimately the most common shelters for a small primate to hide was the numerous barrows made by members of the Suidae family (warthog etc.). The genetic evidence of Suidae-hominin hybridization from around 4 MYA support this hypothesis and features we inherit that are absence at the Pan but are unique to members of Suidae which lived at the same time and regions where our lineage evolved (like sweating and constant growth of hair on the top of the skull and neck for protecting the large skull when crawling in dirt and stone tunnel).

Part 10: Before evil – heavens in the tropical rainforests canopy

10.1 Our evolutionary story started with a creature resembling the Siamang a close relative of Gibbons
We start with an animal resembling the Siamang (skipping the evolution process which created it) living in the vast tropical rainforests covering all of Africa during a long period of “extreme” global warming which saturated the atmosphere with water vapors at when forest covered almost the entire planet. In this lush environment the Siamang/Gibbon-like ancestor of us developed a unique supper power – A unique brain with unique abilities – the source of a new type of TOM an intelligent that is based on collective collateral that is shared with the member of the group and with the ecosystem in which they live. Our Siamang like ancestor (as can be observed in the Siamang and Gibbons today) has been the master of equilibrium in a climax community: An apex animal that is so agile and intelligent that unlike any other animal on earth before and after it had the ability to use its body and mind as the most advanced technology in the animal kingdom..........
True freedom and equality
-
Agility
-

Defining a framework for normality in the human lineage

The whole purpose of my research was to get to the bottom of the evolutionary process that led to the unique cognitive condition of humans which is observably abnormal and in order to define normality we have to look further down the lineage into the early evolution which can supply the apparatuses for the emerge of the human lineage.

Since the current data of our linage early evolution divergence is based on genetic analysis of existing primates and human DNA and since we don’t have a spectrum (understatement..) of primates skeletons from the dates of the divergence of Catarrhini to Anthropoidea and the Anthropoidea Hominoidea to the Hominidae (Pan, Homo etc.) and Hylobatidae (gibbons and siamangs).

I will use one of the Hylobatidae, the Siamang (Symphalangus syndactylus) a member of the Hominoidea outgroup as the reference group to represent our common ancestor, (although the members of the Nomascus concolor (black crested gibbons) are according to some researchers higher on the evolutionary tree) the similarity of the Siamang in size, color and other attributes to the Pan and early humans make it easier comparison.

The Siamang with the rest of the Hylobatidae is the outgroup to the Hominidae (wiki: outgroup is a group of organisms that serve as a reference group when determining the evolutionary relationship among three or more monophyletic groups of organisms. The outgroup is used as a point of comparison for the ingroup—the set of organisms under study that specifically allows the phylogeny to be rooted. Because the polarity (direction) of character change can only be determined on a rooted phylogeny, the choice of outgroup is essential for understanding the evolution of traits along a phylogeny, the outgroup is hypothesized to be closely related to the other groups but less closely related than any single one of the other groups is to each other. The evolutionary conclusion from these relationships is that the outgroup species has a common ancestor with the ingroup that is older than the common ancestor of the ingroup. An outgroup may be a sister group to the ingroup or may be more distantly related).

Normality in the human lineage can be defined by the outgroup, e.g. the Siamang, in the same way normality for dog breeds can be defined by the dog’s outgroup the gray wolf: we can track the deviation from normality in dog breeds by comparing each breed physical and mental characteristics to the wolf.

Outgroup normality exist in the natural constrains of the stage of speciating of the outgroup therefore the natural condition in which the outgroup evolve are the normal conditions for the lineage.

Background and apparatus for the cognitive evolution of humans

Using the Siamang (Symphalangus syndactylus) as an example and reference for our lineage common ancestor

The difference between physical and cognitive adaptation

Most of the evolutionary changes are gradual changes accruing in active traits and developed slowly over time in accordance to the fitness needs of their concurrent environmental conditions, for example when conditions demanding intraspecies aggressive struggle for limited resources, an increase of body mass and a boost of strength in certain muscle groups can be very useful in improving the fitness, physical changes are also very easy to present and advertise for sexual partners. Physical changes need generation of sexual reproduction to evolve: bigger size and stronger muscles can’t occur overnight.

But unlike physical changes cognitive changes can evolve in a slow graduate process, their drivers are not necessarily pure fitness as the main factors for survival will always be based on the minimal needs of physical and cognitive traits which maintain it. Basing survival on the sufficient minimal physical and rudimentary cognitive traits means that the evolution of cognition will follow the same slow and graduate path as physical evolution

But Human’s lineage evolution took a very different path since the days of our common ancestor with the chimpanzee, our cognition have evolved in a very different ways.

Although we still observe normal evolutionary pace of cognition which was maintained throughout our evolution process, we can also observe stages of major leap forward as the (in)famous one that took place ~50,000 years ago which gave birth to our current civilization (unnatural colonization).

The cognitive leaps forward

Cognitive evolution in the human lineage incorporates a unique attribute due to our unique circumstances, starting with the modern primates: we possess a brain that contains an arsenal of dormant traits. Our unique evolution path left layers over layers of evolutionary cognitive adaptations for the different habitats and conditions in the form of brain tissue and parts:

From the beginning of life on earth, in the first stage of evolutionary life on earth for eons we swam the oceans, on the second stage of evolutionary life on earth over countless centuries our ancestors transit to the land, over tenth of millions of years of supremacy of our mammalian-like ancestors, through the hundreds of millions of years of living in the shadows of dinosaurs and predatory birds, trough the rise of the modern supremacy of our mammalian lineage tens of millions years ago, follow the arrival of the lineage of the monkeys and primates the masters of the rain forest canapé until the resent transition from the rain forest canapé to the African grasslands.

Every historical cognitive adaptation to new environments or for specific habitats leaves all the layers of brain parts developed over the millennia, left different absolute adaptations intact – Unlike physical adaptation which completely replaces previous ones. Our brain evolutionary process had left all the stages of our evolution as layers of brain parts, which can be easily observed today.  These layers of brain parts from our basic rudimentary traits to the latest frontal cortex are the “secret weapon” of human’s unique cognition.

These layers contain the unique adaptations to different environments, habitats and survival fitness strategies for each of the concurrent conditions driven such fitness strategy, routed by our unique historical circumstances; the long periods of perfecting our adaptation for different habitats left many cognitive tools which were crucial for our survival at that time.

But many of this adaptation layers have become obsolete when new condition which occur rendered them as such. But nevertheless many of the obsolete layers have stayed and carried along our evolution process in a dormant form.

Most animals’ unique circumstances led them into perfecting their adaptation for a certain environmental fundamental, such as living in the water on land or in the air, within these fundamental environments they had to developed specialization to certain habitat’s fundamentals such as living on the ground or living in trees.

When a species evolution reaches an adaptation equilibrium point in which their survival is ensured, (can be easily observed by long period of evolutionary stagnation in long-term stable population) an outgroup is being established. When an outgroup species is being established the evolutionary process take a different course of more subtle adaptations for specific habitat niches hence sistergroup starts to emerge (in which their superiority to the fundamental environmental adaptation remain and plays the main role e.g. great white sharks vs. manta rays and hammerhead sharks).

Moving between fundamental environments is the main factor in a species cognitive abilities but another important factor is the level of adaptation needed to reach equilibrium of an outgroup to each of the specific fundamental environments that is sufficient enough for the emerge of sistergroup adapted for specific nieces in the fundamental environment.

As a consequence of the change in conditions, the length of the equilibrium periods is usually short and as soon as the outgroup adaptation spread to the extent of its environment boundaries the species will reach the maximum limitation of its environment caring capacity, at this point a species evolution will stagnate but as conditions changes it will start to develop into sister groups and branch into new variations with similar cognition but not necessarily similar physical characteristics.

Every time a species achieves a complete transition between two environment fundamentals the species had also experienced a leap forward in its cognition.

The main factors in rudimentary and non-rudimentary cognitive evolution are the combination of the environment fundamentals and selected fitness strategy of movement (fitness strategy).

The environmental fundamental factors:

  • The dimensions available movement in the environment – 2D vs. 3D
  • The complexity of the environment – the quantity, distribution and variation of objects available for both movement and orientation.
  • The distribution and location of energetically resources available for consumption
Dimensions available for movement are the initial adaptation to an environment and the real driver of a cognitive evolution

The most fundamental rule for rudimentary movement in an environment is the number of available dimensions for movement, there are 2 types of fundamental environments:

3 Dimension spheres – bodies of water (oceans), bodies of gas (atmosphere) and bodies of mass (underground)

2 Dimension spheres – objects surface (ground)

The three dimensional (3D) environment movement fundamentals

Animals swimming in the water, flying in the air, digging tunnels under the ground surface or move between branches in a forest canapé have three dimensions available for their movement (X,Y and Z: up/down, forward/backward and left/right). All the animals with adaptation for 3D movement in 3D environment obeys the same fundamental rules

The two dimensional (2D) environment movement fundamentals

Animals moving on a surface (ground, branches, rocks, ocean bed etc.) have only two dimensions available for their movement (X and Y: forward/backward and left/ right). All of the other adaptations are just a derivative of these fundamental adaptations. All the animals adapted for 2D movement in 2D environment obeys the same fundamental rules

All organisms moving in 3 dimensions will obey the same environment movement fundamentals but their method of movement in their specific habitat may differ: fish and squid living in the 3D environment of water bodies, bat and bird living in the 3D environment of gas bodies and monkey living in the 3D environment of the forest canapé will be subject to the same fundamentals of a 3D environment, while a dear, bear, snake and spider will obey the fundamental rules of moving in a 2D environment.

Species primary adaptation strategy – the main fitness strategy to environmental fundamentals

A fundamental environment obtain a certain limitations that are dependent not only on its essential properties of liquid or gas (air or water) which define the rules of physics for movement in such environmental biosphere but rather by the complexity and orientation which define the available movement and navigation in it, different environmental fundamentals presents different type of approaches and methods for an intentionally moving organism.

There are few factors in a species adaptation to a fundamental environment factors:

  • Dimensions available for movement will define the movement strategy
  • The level of complexity that is utilized for moving and navigating: Complexity of the objects and the methods of their utilization for orientation and navigation will define the orientation and navigation strategies
  • Resources distribution, concentration and energetic value will define the feeding strategy and the agility strategy: The speed of movement in the environment: Agility – high speed movement vs. passivity – low speed movement (stationary objects or passively drift organisms have no need for cognition).

The fundamental fitness strategy of a species is the methods of utilization of the environmental fundamental factors and that will determine its cognitive adaptation in the limitation of the inherit physical attributes of the organism, which affect its size weight and tough brain size

The basic rules of adaptation and transition between fundamental environments

Every time a species transit from one fundamental environment to another, the first main adaptation is a major cognitive change needed in order to achieve the basic stage of fitness – moving and navigating in the environment, which is the ground rule for survival, the movement and navigation in a 3D environment and in a 2D environment demand very different cognitive tools.

Extreme complexity or lack of complexity of an environment are the real driver of a cognitive leap forward in cognitive evolution

The most fundamental rule for non-rudimentary (cognitive) movement in an environment is the availability and complexity of objects for orientation and navigation, there are many types of fundamental orientation and navigation strategies defined by the complexity of the environment.

The main factors in cognitive leaps forward are the transition between fundamental environments:

  • Fish achieved rudimentary cognition for the only environment they have evolved
  • Birds and bats that evolved from fish to land animals (3D to 2D to 3D) have achieved a low non-rudimentary cognition do to the extreme limitation of the weight of their head size in order to fly (insect’s limited size due to the breathing method of tracheae).
  • Land mammals (including mammals that walk on the surface of branches) that evolved from fish (3D to 2D) have achieved a higher non-rudimentary cognition do to the moderate limitation of the weight of their head in order to be supported by their neck (the variation of cognition is usually defined by the complexity of their environment)
  • Ocean mammals like dolphins that evolved from fish to land mammals (3D to 2D and back to 3D) have achieved the third highest non-rudimentary cognition do to the lack of limitation of the weight of their head that is supported by the water but they didn’t evolve further do to the low complexity of their environment (sea lions and other animals that need to breed on land are still limited by the size and weight of the head)
  • Primates that use the movement strategy of brachiation that evolved from fish to land mammals and then to forest’s canapé (3D to 2D and back to 3D) have achieved the second highest non-rudimentary cognition do to the lake of limitation of the weight of their head (hanging from branches align the head with the center of gravity) supported by their neck coupled with extreme agility and complexity of their environment (the primates that made the adaptation for living between the 3D of the canapé and the land (such as the pan members achieved the highest non-rudimentary cognition of primates (3D to 2D to 3D to semi 2D)
  • Humans that evolved from fish to land mammals and then to forest’s canapé primates and back to the land (3D to 2D to 3D and back to 2D) have achieved the highest non-rudimentary cognition do to the lake of limitation of the weight of their head (inherit from their ancestors brachiation).

Achieving absolute adaptation to environment fundamentals creates a species

The absolute-adaptation process is deemed as success if survival equilibrium was achieved

The absolute-adaptation process is deemed as success if survival equilibrium was achieved – the absolute-adaptation usually is achieved by one ancestor in each species lineage:

In any species’ lineage there was one species which achieved the absolute-adaptation for example there was one species in the human lineage that complete the transit from the 3D environment of the oceans to the 2D environment of the land and the absolute-adaptation reached an equilibrium in a certain species of amphibian and from that point it started to branch into sister groups that obeys the same fundamental of the 2D environment while adapting different fitness strategies of movement methods in accordance to specific habitat’s niece attributes (e.g. resources, terrain etc.).

For a species to reach the absolute-adaptation point is the most challenging of all other evolutionary processes and it demands the most fundamental cognitive changes which are firmly correlated to specific species outgroup cognitive potential boundaries (the cognitive change in the simple nerve system of an insect transit from land to water is not as major as for a big brain mammal going the same path and becomes a whale).

If an animal never changed it environment after reaching the equilibrium of the absolute-adaptation it’s brain will remain almost the same as long as is still lives in the same fundamental environment, same for all of its descendants and branches of sister group species: they may have extreme size and weight variations but their cognition will be very similar until one branch will go through another absolute-adaptation, for example one fish species have reached equilibrium point hundreds of million years ago and although they since spread into almost every 3D underwater habitat niches, their cognition have stayed mostly unchanged since it reached the point of absolute-adaptation which was developed only for one fundamental environment, Dolphins on the other hand had the same evolutionary adaptation for 3D environment fundamentals as fish, than they moved out of the ocean and adapt for living in 2D environment on the ground, and once more moved to the oceans where again they adapt to 3D environment and although the physics of Dolphins evolved to be very similar to the fish, the baggage of three absolute-adaptations can be clearly observed by their different brains and cognition.

Fish have never changed their original fundamental environment absolute-adaptation and its cognition has stayed at the same very primitive stage, Dolphins changed their fundamental environment 3 times and their cognition is highly developed as a result.

Dolphins’ intelligent is also supreme to all the land animals that went through 2 absolute-adaptations such as dogs and cats, and is in similar level to animals reached the equilibrium point of the absolute-adaptation the same number of times – the Primates (water (3D), land (2D) and forest canapé (3D)), and all of their cognitions are inferior to the one possessed by Humans which achieved 4 absolute-adaptations.

A species cognitive abilities and intelligence goes hand in hand with the number of transitions between fundamental environments

We are the species with the highest number of movements between fundamental environments which explain the superiority of our cognition:

We had the same evolutionary adaptation for 3D environment in the early oceans, than we moved to the ground and adapt for living in 2D environment on the ground, then we moved into the 3D environment of the forest canapé and ones again we moved to the ground and adapt for living in a 2D environment.

The real first evolutionary leap forward

Our superior cognition is mainly due to our unique evolutionary path which forced us to move to one more fundamental environments than our closest relatives combined with the inherit attribute of head center to gravity which removed the limitation of brain size and weight, that represents the real leap forward of the human lineage.

Moving between fundamental environments always represents a leap forward in cognition and our main leap forward of cognition occurred when we completed the transition from the fundamental 3D environment of the canapé to the 2D fundamental environment of the African savannas.

The roots of the human condition

Our last transition of moving from the 3D fundamental environment of the canapé to the 2D fundamental environment of the grassland was very sharp in evolutionary terms and this period of an exceptionally rapid transition was also when we developed our human condition.

The Human Condition is rooted in evolutionary events which occurred ~6.5 million years ago at the end of the Miocene and that was when we made our first leap forward but the Human Condition which we developed during that time had become dormant shortly after, until something else triggered it’s eruption 60 to 40 thousand years ago which I will refer to as the second leap forward.

When a cognitive adaptation to an environment precede a physical adaptation

But unlike other transition we experienced in the past, the one we experienced ~6.5 mya was very different, unlike previous and later transitions which took us long period of evolutionary adaptations of physical evolutionary changes followed by cognitive adaptations, this one was very swift and brutal and our cognitive adaptations was first, followed by a physical evolution, we are the only organism on earth that his physical evolutionary process was preceded and driven by cognition.

Instead of developing a new layer of cognitive traits following the success of our physical fitness, in a graduate process over long periods of time, we awaken and altered of an older “dormant” traits and adjusted them to fit a certain reality over short period with insufficient time for developing physical fitness to answer for the urgent need determined by sudden conditions and circumstances.

So we resurrect old dormant parts of our brain and render them useful once again for our fitness in the face of the sudden introduction of new conditions resulting from our transition.

Distribution of the Pan members

Siamang Symphalangus syndactylus factsheet


Life span: >40 years (captive)
Total population: 200,000 (Sumatra)
Regions: Malay Peninsula, Sumatra
Gestation: 210 days (7 months)
Height: 73.7 to 88.9 cm (M & F)
Weight: 11.9 kg (M), 10.7 kg (F)

TAXONOMY

Suborder: Haplorrhini
Infraorder: Simiiformes
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hylobatidae
Genus: Symphalangus
Species: S. syndactylus
Subspecies: S. s. syndactylus, S. s. continentis

Other names: Hylobates (Symphalangus) syndactylus, siamang, greater gibbon; S. s. syndactylus: Sumatran siamang; S. s. continentis: Malaysian siamang.

The taxonomic arrangement of siamangs has been modified by Groves (2005) and Mootnick & Groves (2005) who elevated the former subgenus Symphalangus to full generic level where it was formerly a subgenus of Hylobates.

MORPHOLOGY

Among the gibbons, the stocky siamangs are the largest (Mootnick 2006). The pelage is glossy black, the upper body has long hair and the chest is broad (Marshall & Sugardjito 1986; Mootnick 2006). The crown is flat and a white brow-band occurs at low levels (<5%) in captive and museum examples (Geissmann 1993; 2003). Perhaps the most characteristic feature of the siamang is its large inflatable throat sac, which is sparsely haired (Schultz 1933; Marshall & Sugardjito 1986; Mootnick 2006; A.Mootnick pers. comm.). When fully inflated, the throat sac is comparable in size to the animal's head (Papaioannou 1973). Siamangs have no tail, as is the case in all of the lesser, or small, apes (Ankel-Simons 2000). However, males possess a downward directed genital tassel which can be as long as 13.5 cm (5.3 in) and resembles a tail (Marshall & Sugardjito 1986; Mootnick 2006). It is difficult to visibly tell the subspecies apart, although preliminary observations suggest that this might be possible based on nose morphology (Mootnick 2006). The second and third toes are connected by webbing which is variable in its extent, a condition that is reflected in the species' scientific name (Schultz 1933; Marshall & Sugardjito 1986; Mootnick 2006). In addition, sometimes the fourth and fifth toes are also webbed (A. Mootnick & L. Theisen-Watt pers. obs. cited in Mootnick 2006).

There is some sexual dimorphism in siamangs, with males being somewhat larger than females (Wilson & Wilson 1976). In a small wild-shot sample, adult males averaged 11.9 kg (26.2 lb) and adult females averaged 10.7 kg (23.6 lb) (Geissmann 1993). In a much larger survey of captive individuals, adult males averaged 12.8 kg (28.2 lb) and adult females averaged 10.5 kg (23.1 lb) (Orgeldinger 1994). Head and body length ranges between 29 and 35 inches (73.7 and 88.9 cm) (Chivers 1985).

The predominant type of siamang locomotion is its characteristic brachiation, comprising around 80% of its movement (Chivers 1972b cited in Andrews & Groves 1976). This type of locomotion is extremely advantageous in the complex canopy environment for which the species is adapted (Bertram 2004). Other types of locomotion include vertical climbing, swinging, jumping and arboreal bipedal walking (Chivers 1972b cited in Andrews & Groves 1976; Papaioannou 1973).
When compared to other gibbons, siamangs are slower in their movement and they rest by propping or draping themselves in the trees (Chivers 1972a).

In captivity, siamangs can live into their forties (Schmidt & Weigl 1999; Weigl 2005).

RANGE

Siamangs are found on the island of Sumatra (Indonesia) and on the Malay (Malaysia and Thailand) peninsula (Treesucon 1997; Mootnick 2006). Each of the two locations has its own subspecies, with S. s. syndactylus being confined to Sumatra and S. s. continentis confined to the northwest and central Malay Peninsula (Mootnick 2006). Within the Malay peninsula, S. s. continentis is restricted in the east by the Pahang River, in the south by the Maur river and Tasek Bera, and in the north by the Perak river (Chivers 1980). There are no reports of occurrence east of the central range of the peninsula (Groves 1972).
There is at least one report of siamangs from extreme southern Thailand, very near the border with Malaysia on the Malay peninsula in the Narathiwat Province (Treesucon 1997). On Sumatra, S. s. syndactylus occurs over most of the island but is mainly found in the west (MacKinnon 1984; Jenkins 1990).

HABITAT

The tropical hill forest is the primary habitat of the siamang. The species is most often found above 300 m (984.3 ft) in altitude, but can also live in lowland forests (Chivers 1977). In addition to primary lowland and hill forests, siamangs can also live in selectively logged primary freshwater swamp forests, selectively logged lowland forests, selectively logged hill forests and primary submontane forest (Wilson & Wilson 1976). Although sympatric with other gibbons in some habitats, siamangs occur more often at higher elevations than other gibbons (Wilson & Wilson 1976). However, the species is not commonly seen above 1500 m (4921.3 ft), although it may range as high as 1828.8 m (6000 ft) (Medway 1972; Caldecott 1980).

The seasons are not usually distinct in the tropical areas where the siamang lives (Chivers 1974). In southwestern Sumatra, in the Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, rainfall is only weakly seasonal. Annually, it can be between 300 and 400 cm (118.1 and 157.5 in), amounts which are sometimes lower due to severe droughts. At this site, annual temperatures are usually between 22 and 35°C (71.6 and 95°F) but can be as high as 40°C (104°F) (O'Brien et al. 2003; 2004). On the Malay Peninsula, there is a time of increased rainfall around the beginning of each year with a following drier season which is accompanied by warmer temperatures. However, this cycle is variable between years (Chivers 1974). At the study site of Kuala Lompat, in the Krau Game Reserve in the Malay Peninsula during a two-year period, temperatures varied between 16.1 and 33.3°C (61 and 92°F). The wet season lasted roughly November-January, and the dry season between January-April (Chivers 1974).

ECOLOGY

On average, among several study sites in both Malaysia and Indonesia, siamangs eat a variety of foods, including 49% fruit (between 32-61% of the diet), 38% leaves (17-58%), 3% flowers (1-9%), and 10% insects (1-21%) (Papaioannou 1973; Chivers 1974; Raemaekers 1979; MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1980; Palombit 1992; 1997; Bartlett 2007). Of the fruit, figs can make up a significant percentage, up to 37% of the entire siamang diet (Bartlett 2007).
Siamangs also have a preference of leaf types, eating mostly young leaves and only small amounts of mature leaves (Chivers 1974; Raemaekers 1979; MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1980; Palombit 1992). Overall, more than 160 different species
of plant are eaten (T. O'Brien unpubl. data cited in O'Brien et al. 2003).

The daily activity period is usually over ten hours long (Chivers 1974; Raemaekers 1979). In general, siamangs awake around dawn and communally defecate shortly thereafter (Papaioannou 1973; Chivers 1974; Chivers et al. 1975). They will then feed or rest, depending on their proximity to food resources (Chivers 1972a). As to the daily pattern of activity, peaks in feeding occur over the course of the morning and decrease after that for the rest of the day (Papaioannou 1973; Chivers 1977). Resting increases over the day to a peak in the afternoon, and travel peaks in the morning (Chivers 1974).
At night, siamang groups enter the highest branches of a single tree, high above the canopy but sometimes lower and in several trees (Chivers 1974; Gittins & Raemaekers 1980). Sleeping trees are often reused (Chivers 1974).

Daily time budgets vary between study sites, but traveling, resting and feeding typically are predominant activities (Lappan 2005). In Sumatra, male siamangs spend their time feeding (34.0%), resting (36.8%), traveling (16.8%), in social activities (5.2%) and in other activities (7.3%). Female siamangs spend their time feeding (37.3%), resting (33.8%), traveling (16.9%), in social activities (5.4%) and in other activities (7.3%) (Lappan 2005). Elsewhere in Sumatra during a different study, siamangs spent their time resting (44%), feeding and foraging (40%), traveling (12%), in intergroup interactions (3%) and singing (1%) (Palombit 1992; 1997). On the Malay peninsula, the day is spent feeding (50%), resting (25%), and traveling (22%), with grooming, singing and play each taking up about 1% of the day (Gittins & Raemaekers 1980). Among the group, there is a coordination of activities. In one study, all members of a group participated in the same activity over 60-75% of the day (Chivers 1976).

Home ranges vary between 0.2 and 0.48 km² (0.08 and 0.19 mi²), with no or little overlap (Papaioannou 1973; Chivers 1974; Raemaekers 1979; MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1980; Raemaekers & Chivers 1980; Palombit 1996b; O'Brien et al. 2003). Average day ranges of siamang groups range between 640-1289 m (Chivers 1974; Raemaekers 1979; MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1980; Lappan 2005; Bartlett 2007). During wet months, daily travel is shorter than in dry months (Raemaekers 1980). Siamangs spend most of their time high in the forest canopy, over 24 meters (78.7 ft) above the ground, but will also descend to around 7.5 meters (24.6 ft) above the ground and rarely lower (MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1980). Arboreal group movements are usually in single-file through the same pathway (Chivers 1974).

Siamangs live in sympatry with a number of other primates including the slow loris (Nycticebus coucang), long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis), pigtail macaque (Macaca nemestrina), Thomas's langur (Presbytis thomasi), lar gibbon (Hylobates lar), agile gibbon (Hylobates agilis), banded langur (Presbytis melalophos), ebony langur (Trachypithecus auratus), Horsfield's tarsier (Tarsius bancanus), and Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii) (Palombit 1992; Lappan 2005). In addition, in northern Sumatra, siamangs are sympatric with orangutans and lar gibbons, the only place in the world where three species of non-human apes coexist (Palombit 1996b). The siamang and other gibbons with which it is sympatric might compete for food as in some cases there is diet overlap (Raemaekers 1984). This is the case with the sympatric lar gibbon where infrequent confrontations between siamangs and the species over food resources have been observed (Raemaekers 1978). In addition, in at least one study, a male siamang associated with a male lar gibbon and the pair traveled, fed, and even chorused together (MacKinnon & MacKinnon 1977).

In general, predation on gibbons is not well documented, and in no field study of either Hylobates sp. or Symphalangus syndactylus has direct predation been observed (see Uhde & Sommer 2002). However, a full-sized siamang was found in the digestive tract of a python (Schneider 1906 cited in Uhde & Sommer 2002).

Content last modified: May 20, 2008

Written by Kurt Gron. Reviewed by Alan Mootnick.

Cite this page as: Gron KJ. 2008 May 20. Primate Factsheets: Siamang (Symphalangus syndactylus) Taxonomy, Morphology, & Ecology

Chimpanzee Pan troglodytes factsheet


Life span: 40 to 45 years (wild), up to 60 (captive)
Total population: 200,000 (wild), 1450 (captive)
Regions: Equatorial Africa
Gestation: 8 months (240 days)
Height: 816 mm (M & F)
Weight: 40 to 60 kg (M), 32 to 47 kg (F)

TAXONOMY

Suborder: Haplorrhini
Infraorder: Simiiformes
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Pan
Species: P. troglodytes
Subspecies: P. t. schweinfurthii, P. t. troglodytes, P. t. vellerosus, P. t. verus

Other names: common chimpanzee, robust chimpanzee, Western or masked chimpanzee (P.t. verus), Central African or black-faced chimpanzee (P.t.troglodytes), East African or long-haired chimpanzee (P.t. schweinfurthii), Nigeria chimpanzee (P.t. vellerosus).

Some argue that chimpanzees should be categorized in the same genus as humans, Homo, based on the fact that chimpanzees and humans diverged only 4 to 6 million years ago (Groves 2001). The implications of changing the taxonomical categorization could have enormous impacts on how chimpanzees are perceived and the rights extended to them. For example, by categorizing chimpanzees as Homo, it might be considered unethical to keep them in zoos or use them in research.

MORPHOLOGY

Chimpanzees exhibit very little morphological differences between subspecies. They have a more robust build than bonobos (Pan paniscus) and are slightly sexually dimorphic with males, on average, weighing 40 to 60 kg (88.2 to 132 lb) and females, on average, weighing 32 to 47 kg (70.5 to 104 lb) (Rowe 1996). Males and females have an average height of 816 mm (2.68 ft) (Rowe 1996).

Chimpanzees are all black but are born with pale faces and a white tail tuft, both of which darken with age. They have prominent ears and both males and females have white beards.

Locomotion patterns include quadrupedal knuckle walking and occasional bipedalism. Chimpanzees are both terrestrial and arboreal, with the amount of time spent on the ground varying between study sites and between sexes (Doran 1996).
All chimpanzees build sleeping nests in trees at night (Rowe 1996).

The average lifespan of chimpanzees is 40 to 45 years, though it is considerably longer for captive chimpanzees (Macdonald 2001).

RANGE

CURRENT RANGE MAPS (IUCN REDLIST): Pan troglodytes

Chimpanzees are found across a west-east belt in equatorial Africa. Their range spans 22 countries: Angola, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon,Central African Republic (CAR), Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda (Butynski 2001; Nishida et al. 2001). This represents a total area of about 2.5 million km² (965,255 mi²) though the majority (about 77%) of the total estimated population can be found in only two countries, Gabon and Congo (Cowlishaw & Dunbar 2000). Odzala National Park, Congo boasts the highest population density of chimpanzees in Central Africa with 2.2 individuals per km² (1.37 per mi²) while Gabon has the largest population (Bermejo 1999; Butynski 2001). Researchers roughly estimate the wild population of chimpanzees to be between 100,000 and 200,000 (Nishida et al. 2001). There are approximately 250 animals in zoos and another 1,200 in research facilities (Goodall 2001).

Chimpanzees have been studied at 41 sites, but there are a few long-term study sites and notable scientists that have been sources of invaluable discoveries about chimpanzee biology, society, and culture. In 1960, Jane Goodall began the first long-term study of wild chimpanzees (P.t. schweinfurthii). Her research in Tanzania at Gombe Stream National Park led to significant discoveries about social relationships, tool-use, and warfare in chimpanzee societies. At another site in Tanzania, Toshisada Nishida began a long-term research project on the chimpanzees (P.t. schweinfurthii) of the Mahale Mountains National Park. Christophe and Hedwige Boesch have headed the research on chimpanzees (P.t. verus) in Taï National Park in Côte d'Ivoire since 1976. Other important study sites include Bossou, Guinea and sites in Uganda including the Ngogo study site in Kibale National Park and Budongo Forest Reserve.

HABITAT

Because of their broad distribution, chimpanzees live in a wide variety of habitat types that includes dry savannas, evergreen rainforests, montane forests, swamp forests, and dry woodland-savanna mosaics (Goodall 1986; Fruth et al. 1999; Poulsen & Clark 2004). To live across such different habitat types, chimpanzees must be quite adaptable. In low-altitude rainforests, there is little change in temperature from season to season, the humidity is always high, and there are few dry days each year. In contrast, the arid areas, including the north and southeastern limits of their range (Senegal and Tanzania, respectively), show huge fluctuations in temperature and humidity throughout the year as well as long dry periods (Goodall 1986). Another dry habitat where chimpanzees have been studied is Semliki, Uganda, where average annual rainfall is 1206 mm (3.95 ft) and maximum temperatures reach 34°C (93.2°F) (Hunt et al. 2002).

Characterizations of temperature and rainfall are mostly available for sites where long-term research is being conducted. Gombe and Mahale are similar in climate and character, though Mahale is slightly more humid with more woodlands and higher mountains (Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000). Gombe is made up of steep ridges and valleys bordering Lake Tanganyika, one of Africa's Great Lakes. There is marked seasonality here, with the wet season spanning from mid-October to mid-May, and the rest of the year being quite dry. Daily temperatures range from 18.5°C to 30°C (65°F to 86°F) throughout the year, with August and September being the hottest months (Goodall 1986). Because of the dramatic
changes in elevation at Gombe, there are a variety of vegetation types throughout the park: subalpine moorland, open woodland, semideciduous forest, evergreen forest, grassland with scattered trees, and beach (Goodall 1986). At Bossou, the major part of the core area utilized by chimpanzees consists of multi-stage secondary deciduous forest arising in plots abandoned after shifting agriculture. The other areas at Bossou are primary forest and grasslands (Sugiyama & Koman 1987). The chimpanzees at Taï inhabit the only remaining tropical rainforest in Côte d'Ivoire (Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000). While there is no true dry season, the rainy seasons are from March to June and between September and November, and the average minimum temperature is 18°C (64°F) (Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000).

ECOLOGY

The chimpanzee diet consists mainly of fruit, but they also eat leaves and leaf buds, and the remaining part of their diet consists of a mixture of seeds, blossoms, stems, pith, bark and resin (Goodall 1986). Chimpanzees are highly specialized frugivores and across all study sites preferentially eat fruit, even when it is not abundant. They supplement their mainly vegetarian diet with insects, birds, birds' eggs, honey, soil, and small to medium-sized mammals (including other primates) (Goodall 1986; Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 1989; Isabirye-Basuta 1989). Their most common mammalian prey is the red colobus monkey (Procolobus badius), though they also eat blue duikers, bushbucks, red-tailed monkeys (Cercopithecus ascanius), yellow baboons (Papio cynocephalus cynocephalus), and warthogs (Boesch et al. 2002). Chimpanzees spend, on average, half of their days feeding, and much time moving from one food source to the next (Goodall 1986). The actual time spent feeding, though, is correlated with the amount of processing time required by the type of food being consumed.

The use of tools to obtain some foods has been documented across all chimpanzee populations. Sticks, rocks, grass, and leaves are all commonly used materials that are modified into tools and used to acquire and eat honey, termites, ants, nuts, and water. While these implements may seem too crude to be considered true tools, there certainly is evidence that forethought and skill are required to make and use them and lack of complexity should not detract from the fact that they are still tools (Boesch & Boesch 1993). For example, to extract honey from the hives of stingless bees, chimpanzees use short sticks stripped of their leaves, twigs, and bark to most effectively scoop it out of the hive. On the other hand, to extract honey from the hives of aggressive African honeybees, chimpanzees use significantly longer and thinner sticks to avoid the painful stings of these bees (Stanford et al. 2000). In a similar fashion, chimpanzees strip the leaves off of long, thin sticks and use these to extract ants from ground nests (Goodall 1986; Boesch & Boesch 1993). This practice requires some amount of skill, and infant and juvenile chimpanzees must practice a great deal before mastering the technique necessary to extract the ants still clinging to the thin, flexible tools. In fact, some chimpanzees never fully master the skill of ant dipping, and in general, females are more successful than males in this endeavor (Goodall 1986; Boesch & Boesch 1993). A similar tool and technique is used to extract termites from nests at Gombe, but at Taï, the chimpanzees simply use their hands (Boesch & Boesch 1993).

Using a hammer and anvil tool set made of fallen branches or hand-held stones and exposed tree roots or rocky outcroppings, chimpanzees in West Africa crack hard nuts (Boesch & Boesch 1993; Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000). Often these items are not found together or near a source of nuts, so nut-cracking chimpanzees must exhibit forethought to gather the appropriate accoutrements to eat these important high-protein, high-fat foods. Like ant fishing, nut cracking is a skill that must be learned, and infants and juveniles must learn from their mothers the appropriate tools and movements to shell nuts (Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000).
Chimpanzees also use leaves as sponges or spoons to drink water. Selectively choosing the type of leaf to use, chimpanzees crumple these leaves in their mouths and then submerge them in water; the crumpled leaves act like a sponge and they suck the water out of them and repeat the process (Sugiyama 1995). This behavior is especially prevalent where water is scarce at certain times of year and it is so deep in tree holes that chimpanzees cannot easily access it directly with their mouths.

Chimpanzees have excellent mental maps of their home ranges and use these to locate food resources repeatedly. Their attention may be directed to a new food source by a noisy group of animals, such as birds or other primates, or they may be led to a new fruit tree or termite mound by a foraging companion that has been there before (Goodall 1986).

Long thought to be free of natural predators because of their large body size, work in the Taï Forest and at Lopé National Park, Gabon has shown that leopard (Panthera pardus) attacks can be a significant cause of mortality in chimpanzees (Boesch &Boesch-Achermann 2000; Henschel et al. 2005). The extent to which leopards choose to hunt chimpanzees is unclear, though, and may be the work of just a few risk-taking cats (Boesch & Boesch-Achermann 2000). Lions are also capable of killing chimpanzees, and predation by lions has been observed at Mahale Mountains National Park in Tanzania, but there are scant observations of lion predation at other sites where they are sympatric with chimpanzees (Tsukahara 1993).

Content last modified: April 13, 2006

Written by Kristina Cawthon Lang. Reviewed by Elaine Videan.

Cite this page as: Cawthon Lang KA. 2006 April 13. Primate Factsheets: Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) Taxonomy, Morphology, & Ecology

Bonobo Pan paniscus factsheet


Life span: 40 years (captive)
Total population: 50,000-100,000
Regions: Democratic Republic of Congo
Gestation: 8 months (240 days)
Height: 730 to 880 mm (M), 700 to 760 mm (F)
Weight: 39 kg (M), 31 kg (F)

TAXONOMY

Suborder: Haplorrhini
Infraorder: Simiiformes
Superfamily: Hominoidea
Family: Hominidae
Genus: Pan
Species: P. paniscus

Other names: bonobo chimpanzee, gracile ape, lesser chimpanzee, or pygmy chimpanzee; chimpanzeé nain or chimpanzeé pygmée (French); chimpancé pigmeo (Spanish); bonobo or dvärgschimpans (Swedish). The name bonobo is meaningless; it is probably derived from a misspelling on a shipping crate going to Bolobo, Zaire (now Democratic Republic of Congo) (de Waal 1997).

MORPHOLOGY

Bonobos are sometimes called pygmy chimpanzees even though they are about the same size as chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Overall, they have a more gracile, or slender, build than chimpanzees. They exhibit moderate sexual dimorphism with adult males weighing about 39 kg (86.0 lb) and, on average, measuring 730 to 830 mm (2.40 to 2.72 ft) tall while adult females weigh about 31 kg (68.3 lb) and are about 700 to 760 mm (2.3 to 2.49 ft) tall (Rowe 1996).

Bonobos have black hair and black faces from birth. The hair on their head looks as if it is parted and they do not tend to go bald with age as is seen in chimpanzees. Bonobos are also born with a white rump tuft (Rowe 1996; de Waal 1997).

Locomotion patterns in bonobos include quadrupedal knuckle walking, modified brachiation and some bipedalism (Rowe 1996). Bonobos show a greater predisposition for bipedal gait than other apes because of a more centrally positioned foramen magnum, longer thigh bones, longer feet, and differential distribution of body weight (Myers Thompson 2002).

The average lifespan of bonobos is 40 years (Rowe 1996).

RANGE

Bonobos are confined to a 200,000 km² (77,220 mi²) area in central Africa in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This area, roughly the size of Great Britain, in the central basin of the DRC, contains two river systems that converge to define the extent of bonobo distribution: the Congo-Zaire-Walaba River and the Kwa-Kasai-Sankuru River (Kortlandt 1995). These rivers serve as an effective geographical barrier for the apes as they are not known to swim (though they have been seen wading into waist-deep water) (Kortlandt 1995; Myers Thompson 2002). IUCN Redlist estimates a minimum range size of 500,000 km² (IUCN Redlist).

Estimates of wild populations are few and varied, with numbers as low as 5,400 up to 100,000 individuals (Kortlandt 1995; Thompson-Handler et al. 1995). These numbers may be considered overly optimistic, though, and the true population size is unknown (Coxe et al. 2000). IUCN Redlist reports a population estimate of at least 29,500 individuals (IUCN Redlist). There are about 150 individuals in captivity (ISIS.org).

Most fieldwork has been conducted in two sites, Lomako and Wamba, but other research sites include Lilungu (Ikela), Yalosidi, Yasa, and Tumba. The bonobos at the Wamba study site have been observed since 1974 and are provisioned with food such as sugarcane (de Waal 1997).

HABITAT

Bonobos exploit the swampy rainforest south of the Zaire River. They forage in swamp meadows on a thin underlying peat layer. The semideciduous trees that this area supports produce fleshy fruits adapted to mammal dispersion. These trees are part of a secondary
forest ecosystem and are generally in intermediate and older stages of development. These forests are also known as subclimax forests (Kortlandt 1995). At one of the field sites, Lukuru, there is an absence of swamp vegetation and bonobos utilize the mosaic of dry forest and savanna habitats (Myers Thompson 2002).

The average monthly air temperature in this region is between 20° to 30° C (68° to 86° F). The annual rainfall in this area is between 1600 and 2000 mm (5.25 and 6.56 ft) (Kano 1992).

ECOLOGY

The population density of bonobos is hard to estimate, but some studies have put it at 0.4 individuals per km² (.249 per mi²) (Kano 1992; Kortlandt 1995). Even in the most densely populated areas, these apes have a patchy distribution.

Their diet consists mainly of plant products including fruit, seeds, sprouts, leaves, flowers, bark, stems, pith, roots, and mushrooms.
Though the majority of their diet is fruit (57%), bonobos are also known to consume small mammals, insect larvae, earthworms, honey, eggs, and soil (Kano 1992; Bermejo et al. 1994). Unlike chimpanzees, bonobos do not actively hunt mammalian prey but feed on it opportunistically (White 1996). At one study site, bonobos have been observed washing off their food before eating (Bermejo et al. 1994).

Daily activities can be partitioned into six categories: feeding in trees, rest, travel, foraging, nest-building, and group excitement.
These daily activities are generally in a cycle of resting (43% of the day), traveling (13%), foraging (20%), and feeding (20%). The remaining time is spent doing other activities. Bonobos forage for principal food items between 25 and 40 m (82 and 131 ft) above the ground. Though
most primary food sources are found at this height, they will not ingest food found at this height if there is not a secure substrate (Kano 1992). Their average daily travel distance is 2.0 km (1.24 mi) (Kano 1992).
Because of the relative richness of their habitat and availability of food sources, there is little constraint on bonobo group size. The result is a decrease in intraspecific feeding competition and heightened sociality, especially between females (Blount 1990).

Written by Kristina Cawthon Lang. Reviewed by Frans de Waal.

Cite this page as:
Cawthon Lang KA. 2010 December 1. Primate Factsheets: Bonobo (Pan paniscus) Taxonomy, Morphology, & Ecology .

Primate Info Net is maintained by the Wisconsin Primate Research Center (WPRC) Library at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
WPRC programs are supported by grant numbers RR000167 and RR015311, National Primate Centers Program, National Center for Research Resources, the National Institutes of Health.

A preview of included work

The evolution of fear in the human lineage

It's the fear that creates the need for abstract symbolic objects; it's the requirements of a cognitive system evolved to achieve the fastest reaction time as possible for a threat, it’s a system that is constantly active in a creature that spend its entire life in a constant state of alert hence fear, and it’s the normal state for that creature.

Most creatures are depended on two lines of defense - always in the following order: 

  • 1st line of defense: Earliest detection time of a “threat X”
  • 2nd line of defense: Earliest reaction time to the disclosed “threat X”

We on the other hand are depended only on the 2nd line of defense our 1st line of defense – the earliest detection is completely imaginary and internally produced (it called belief):

We are solely dependent on earliest as possible reaction time to a threat that are randomly and suddenly appears out of the blue as we are lacking any proper earliest detection system – especially when we sleep. 

The deep sleep of an animal sleeping in the safety of the sheltering canapé is the first main hurdle of such animal now living on the exposed dangerous ground with no change in physiology.

This is mean that we have lived with extreme sense of fear and all of our fight or flight systems where constantly on, in other words we couldn’t sleep especially at night.

And when you can’t sleep you become delusional and delusions are day dreaming (optimism) that’s how we started to imagine a better future and dream away (cover-up) current realities. 

Luckily we developed an amazing 3 dimensional imaginary system (to calculate fast and agile brachiation (swinging between branches) which includes parabolic movement in 3 dimensional environment of the canapé (aspheric axis system)) based on amazing short term memory with capacity to process gigabits of fast incoming information and to produce an internal output of the future while traveling in speeds of 50 kilometer per hour leaping 30 meters in the air in the most complex (branches…) environment on the planet .

This amazing and unique ability of the tailless swingers is not shared with any other surface dwelling animal (walking on land or on branch are the same both are surface by definition – hence a 2 dimensional environment):

Only swingers can calculate three dimensional parabolic routs utilizing Newton's second law of motion together with Conservation Laws and Conservation of Momentum laws) producing accurate prediction.

Not only that the calculations are than being scripted and broadcast and presented in IMAX quality by our  Brain(Computer)-generated imagery (BGI)), this system was our pervious navigation and orientation system resides in the heads of our gibbon like ancestors: this system was used for predicting and flashing vivid three dimensional set of colored picture of the future (animated gif) portraying your next muscle movement that are needed to be executed and synchronize all the way to your next contact point with reality: your imaginary BGI animated gif image portraying you arriving to the next contact point (a branch) a fraction of a second before you actually arrived, this ability to produce a vivid set of simulated picture of future reality in order to prepare and synchronize the bodily systems (motoric, hormonal etc.) until the next brief point of contact with reality.

There is an important consequence for the constant delay of reality by images of the near/immediate future: when you move in the environment at high speed you live in past prediction of the near future, you never live in the moment rather always living the next step before it occurred.

Our future projections are depending on a vivid image from the past (experience), where imaginary image always blocks the present attention and perception while reality is always caught a moment earlier and only briefly in other words the still image of our imagined future produced when we are swinging in high speed in the forest canapé is what is now utilized by the creature (slow) long term memory to store multiple images both real and imagined which enable it built more complexes scenarios based on multiple individual images ordered to simulate a route of many steps forward leading to the best moment ever which is imagined in the far future.

This photo album is used to produce vivid movies which can hide many moments of current reality (hours, days, weeks, years, lifetime…) and to vividly cover-up and blocks (but not bilk) reality (more about the real evolution of cognition and the real definition of intelligence will be published soon). 

So with DreamWorks studios in our heads we were ready to imagine better times in the abstract future and denial reality; which turned out to be the winning fitness strategy at those times.

Only the dreamers survived as one important factor played for their hands – dreaming also means sleeping.

Here you have a group of apes with 50%/50% chance to make it through the night whether they are fully awake or deep-sleeping:

With weak sense of hearing (with stationary small ears facing forward) and zero night vision (eyes evolved for capturing high resolution contrast and color images while swinging 50 kph in the forest canapé). 

The Gibbon like animal unchanged for Epochs (as we have been at that point of time) was perfectly adapted for 12 hour’s sunlight and 12 hours of darkness. This equatorial cycle dividing the life of the creature for 12 hours of day activities and 12 hours of night sleep.

The creature was fearless as it had no predators that can catch it when it awake or reach it when it sleeps.

The creature didn’t need the fight part of the fight or flight mechanism hence it lack the sense of fear as at night this lightweight animal was deep sleeping in the safety of the top branches of 30+ meter tall tree, and at days it’s agility made it unreachable by the tropical forest predators (example: Gibbon versus 2 tigers).  

On the African savannahs on the other hand a Gibbon like creature cannot escape daytime predators and cannot even detect nocturnal predators; not alone can it escape via running on the ground or climbing on the scares and low trees in total darkness.

So on one side you had the logic apes staying on-guard as long as they can and die from exhaustion and on the other hand you have the delusional apes getting 12 hours sleep every third night as long their number didn’t came up in the lottery of “the early evolution unbearable easiness of death”. 

Well that’s sum-up the chances of survival of each one of the groups with their corresponding strategy and trait:

  • Group A: Strategy A: facing the threats utilizing trait A: logic
  • Group B: Strategy B: ignoring the threats utilizing trait B: denial, of reality

It’s clearly evident that the survival rate of members of group A, at that particular point of time, was very low, probably around 5% due to death from the 24/7 stress related symptoms.

While the members of group B had higher surviving rate as they died at half the pace for they were exposed to only half the amount of 12 hours of stress with 12 hours of stress reliving sleep daily.

And the fear was even more severe for the youngsters and females as the lack of ability of the species to access their traditional food sources, made the hungry apes cannibals, so the fear of the youngster and females had another factor of fear of your own kind, every male can potentially kill any female or youngster and every female can potentially kill any youngster including her own.

It was a state of a total mistrust between all individuals of a previously peaceful and sexually equal species, the natural tendencies of mistrust and new gestures of trust for diffuse aggression than started to enter into our gene pool.

We can observe a primate starting to reorganize its society in the way the chimps are today. It was a period of transition from one type of fitness strategy to another, from one type of animal to multiple variations of multiple strategy and their correspondence traits, phenotype and behaviors. 

Our large size of brain is an indicator for a categorical thinking system that is dependent on memorizing (storing) large database of complete and modular data-sets of preprogrammed operating symbols that include steps, routs, instruction, scenarios, points of hazards points of interest and necessities etc.
Large long-term memory data base, limited short-term memory based abilities, limited multi-leveled dimensionality and more than 50% presents of external stimulus is processed via the low-road.

In other words the large brain is not a sign of intelligence rather a sign of incompetence and lack of orientation that force memorizing instructions of how to operate in a 2D environment that have only 2 dimensional surface points of reference , making your ability to orient yourself as an important point of interest/reference that has to be oriented against unreliable memories of objects and the only possibility to orient yourself is by keeping a strict rout that is memorize according to landmarks or your emotional feeling of familiarity or fear at certain points of your rout (the scary dark forest, the open safe plane etc.).

Our gibbon like ancestor brain size is an indicator for a systematic thinking as all other small/medium brains of tree living monkeys and primates. Systematic thinking brain is not dependent on memorizing (storing) large database of complete and modular symbols, rather small amount of symbols that represents only necessities such as graphic representation of points of interest and limited array of memorized locations. The short-term memory abilities on the other hand are extensive: the multi-leveled dimensionality is way over 7 (the average "smart" categorical thinkers / I think that levels of thinking dimensionality can help define the brain usage and mindset:

  • Under 5 levels of thinking dimensionality – categorical thinking with 66% or more of stimulus are processed via low-road
  • 5 to 7 levels of thinking dimensionality give individual mix ability ~50% stimulus go through the low-road
  • Over 7 levels of thinking dimensionality – systems thinking with 66% or more of stimulus are processed via the high-road and less than 33% presents of external stimulus is processed via the low road system.

From tangible constant fear of gruesome and unpredictable death to a constant irrational fear: the shaper of our evolution, culture and civilization

The fastest way to react to threat is to be able to trigger at once all the corresponding bodily systems that are needed to deal with the threat that produced the sensation, and to have a reaction plan in hand, more of a manual with point of beginning and point of end, and to have immediate set of reactions for the imminent and eminent events, it’s an auto pilot mechanism that is taking over the controls of the cockpit – an instinct, that while it’s on (as long as the fear is there) the animal is in autopilot cognition mode.    

And the ability to switch to a state of paralyzing denial sinking into ensuring and reassuring fantasy worlds and fall asleep when fear is or isn’t tangible (which clear the cortisol from the blood).

The fear from other intentional agents was first triggered by the creature semi-dormant ancient an undeveloped (at that time) fight or flight mechanism usually dealing with very tangible situations of personal risks for animal living sometimes hundred meters above the ground such as falling.

When the circuits of fear are at work, the cognition process is skipping the short term memory and it's corresponding circuits, which is where the logic process happens, instead it's completely relay on the long term memory areas where cognitive process have two main purposes:

Input of traumatic events that are based of fear of the unknown road ahead hence memorizing landmarks and dangerous hazard as well as points of replenishment (pits stop) a pavlovian conditioning.

The second is output which is exactly the reverse process of the input.

And the way it works is that it stacks images, noises and smell samples into area of the brain where the symbol fits:

According to the stimulus the whole disc is triggered and the current symbols that have connotations to that disc area will be stored or used for next time a stimulus representing need or threat is triggering the amygdala: nutritional items such as food are stacked in one area which supply also other apparatuses such as the emotional feeling and physical reaction (saliva and stomach acids) of the rest of the organs that the limbic system needs to trigger, but the input and output of all this super symbol synaptic connection super symbol disc is working as two option switch:

Positive - go forward and negative - go backward.

This is correspondence with the 2 dimensional environment where movement have only this two options, on a circle it will look like there are two halves one is including the dial of 180 degrees of movement forward possibilities and the other half is the same for moving backward. Where the direction is always determine by the point of arrival, which is important as orientation in a 2D environment is based on a chain of landmarks that creates a rout where your current location and forward direction is determine by the last previous point of orientation/reference.

The areas in the brain, which store this long term memory will be made by flat structure of synaptic connections which organized as a disc where the center of the connection disk is on an intersection with other discs which gives the 2D orientation map.

This disks are organized on the membrane surrounding the main area of the 3D navigation system which use the inside of the sphere membranes for a 3D organization of synaptic connections organized as spheres and utilizing the inside areas of the membrane. The disc shapes are distorted by the living surface of the neurons clusters: Like distorted gravity field of an elastic disc placed on an uneven surface............

Definition of a species and it’s state

Ecological pyramid

An ecological pyramid (also trophic pyramid, eltonian pyramid, energy pyramid, or sometimes food pyramid) is a graphical representation designed to show the biomass or bio productivity at each trophic level in a given ecosystem.
Biomass is the amount of living or organic matter present in an organism. Biomass pyramids show how much biomass is present in the organisms at each trophic level, while productivity pyramids show the production or turnover in biomass.
Energy pyramids begin with producers on the bottom (such as plants) and proceed through the various trophic levels (such as herbivores that eat plants, then carnivores that eat herbivores, then carnivores that eat those carnivores, and so on). The highest level is the top of the food chain.
An energy pyramid of biomass shows the relationship between biomass and trophic level by quantifying the biomass present at each trophic level of an energy community at a particular time. It is a graphical representation of biomass (total amount of living or organic matter in an ecosystem) present in unit area in different tropic levels. Typical units are grams per meter2, or calories per meter2. The pyramid of biomass may be "inverted". For example, in a pond ecosystem, the standing crop of phytoplankton, the major producers, at any given point will be lower than the mass of the heterotrophs, such as fish and insects. This is explained as the phytoplankton reproduce very quickly, but have much shorter individual lives.
One problem with biomass pyramids is that they can make a trophic level appear to contain more energy than it actually does. For example, all birds have beaks and skeletons, which despite having mass are not eaten by the next trophic level.
There is also pyramid of numbers which represent the number of organisms in each trophic level. They may be upright (e.g. Grassland ecosystem), inverted (parasitic ecosystem) or dumbbell shaped (forest ecosystem).

Pyramid of productivity

An 'ecological pyramid of productivity' is often more useful, showing the production or turnover of biomass at each trophic level. Instead of showing a single snapshot in time, productivity pyramids show the flow of energy through the food chain. Typical units are grams per meter2 per year or calories per meter2 per year. As with the others, this graph shows producers at the bottom and higher trophic levels on top.

When an ecosystem is healthy, this graph produces a standard ecological pyramid. This is because in order for the ecosystem to sustain itself, there must be more energy at lower trophic levels than there is at higher trophic levels. This allows organisms on the lower levels to not only to maintain a stable population, but also to transfer energy up the pyramid. The exception to this generalization is when portions of a food web are supported by inputs of resources from outside the local community. In small, forested streams, for example, the volume of higher levels is greater than could be supported by the local primary production.
When energy is transferred to the next trophic level, typically only 10% of it is used to build new biomass, becoming stored energy (the rest going to metabolic processes) (Pauly and Christensen, 1995). In this case, in the pyramid of productivity each step will be 10% the size of the previous step (100,000, 10,000, 1,000, 100, 10, 1, .1, .01).
The advantages of the pyramid of productivity as a representation:

  • It takes account of the rate of production over a period of time.
  • Two species of comparable biomass may have very different life spans. Thus a direct comparison of their total biomasses is misleading, but their productivity is directly comparable.
  • The relative energy chain within an ecosystem can be compared using pyramids of energy; also different ecosystems can be compared.
  • There are no inverted pyramids.
  • The input of solar energy can be added.

The disadvantages of the pyramid of productivity as a representation:

  • The rate of biomass production of an organism is required, which involves measuring growth and reproduction through time.
  • There is still the difficulty of assigning the organisms to a specific trophic level. As well as the organisms in the food chains there is the problem of assigning the decomposers and detritivores to a particular trophic level.
  • Nonetheless, productivity pyramids usually provide more insight into an ecological community when the necessary information is available.
  • An ecological pyramid of numbers shows graphically the population of each level in a food chain.

The definition of a species and its state are relative to its ecological community and its state of equilibrium or non-equilibrium

There are two fundamental states for a species, for individual organisms and for ecological community’s state of equilibrium and state of non-equilibrium.
The ecosystem’s non-equilibrium states have two options recession or development accordingly a species or an individual organism can either have a negative or positive long-term or short-term EROEI.

  • A species is defined as one only if it reaches equilibrium at any trophic position.
  • An Apex Predator species is a predator residing at the top of a food chain upon which no other creatures prey. Apex predators are usually defined in terms of trophic dynamics, meaning that apex-predator species occupy the highest trophic level or levels and play a crucial role in maintaining the health of their ecosystems. 
  • An Apex Consumer species is defined as one only if it reaches equilibrium at the highest trophic position possible: An Apex Consumer is a non-predatory species that have no intraspecies competitors/predators and therefore position at the top of the food chain of its climax community (the carrying capacity of a biological species in an environment is the maximum population size of the species that the environment can sustain indefinitely, given the food, habitat, water, and other necessities available in the environment).

A species that reach the level of Apex Consumer will include all of the following characteristics:

  • The species size, weight, morphology and physiology will reach a constant static state
  • The species lifespan and longevity are extended to the maximum
  • The species as whole and most individuals will maintain consistent level of positive EROEI short-term (weekly/monthly) and long-term (yearly/lifetime).
  • Reach and maintain an optimal size for maintaining the surplus (largest size possible for an organism while maintaining the maximal state of equilibrium)
  • Energy used to make each individual is high
  • Few offspring are produced
  • Late maturity, often after a prolonged period of parental care
  • Long life expectancy
  • Individuals can reproduce more than once in their lifetime
  • Most individuals live near to the maximum lifespan

The only way a species can maximize its energetic equilibrium is by reducing the energy invested in the necessity (productive activities):
Eating, mating and ensuring the survival of the minimum number of offspring’s that is required for maintaining the population size equilibrium in the climax community (maintain its trophic level of an Apex Consumer).

Minimalize the energy wasted on unproductive activities such as fighting, hiding, escaping etc. and counter-wellbeing lack of activities (sleeping, socializing etc.)
Every activity other than the necessity can jeopardize its energetic equilibrium constant; these activities are all the activities that result in a negative EROEI and are not directly contribute for eating, mating and parenting and the wellbeing activities involved (foraging, sleeping, playing, socializing etc.).

These activities are all related for a non-equilibrium state of a species and a non-equilibrium state of its environment (a state of disturbance or a state of succession) this activities are all related for Intraspecies and interspecies competition (resources, space, mating) and basic survival (not being injured or killed).

  • Every strategy to address this kind of state is considered a non-equilibrium strategy:
    Any type of social organization that consist outside the period of mating and parenting that is higher than a core family (one male and one female)
  • Any need to invest high levels of energy before every cycle of breading in finding and winning a mate etc.
  • With no need to develop social strategies an Apex Consumer invest in the individuals of the species to ensure both genders will have maximum level of equilibrium, it means that both genders have equal size, weight, morphology and physiology in a constant static state as well as life histories, longevity and maximal lifespan.

The highest level of energetic equilibrium that can be reached by a species is the ability to maintain consistent positive daily EROEI 365 days a year throughout its total lifespan. Only a species that can maintain the highest level of energetic equilibrium for long periods can reach the maximum extended longevity, lifespan and life histories.