Do modern hunter-gatherers live in marginal habitats?
Do modern hunter-gatherers live in marginal habitats?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.05.028
复制
发表时间：
2019-06-01
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Wrangham, Richard W.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cunningham, Andrew J.;Worthington, Steven;Wrangham, Richard W.
人类学家经常断言，与他们的农业邻居相比，现代狩猎采集社会已经被降级到边缘栖息地，这意味着现代社会组织和行为对旧石器时代狩猎采集社会的了解很少。我们把这种想法称为边际生境假说（MHH）。尽管“边际”一词被广泛使用，但对于人类低质量栖息地的构成，人们几乎没有达成共识。本文通过比较186个前工业社会（采集者、园艺师、集约化农学家和牧民）的栖息地净初级生产力（NPP）和人口密度（PD），重新评估了MHH。我们发现，NPP-PD关系的性质因生计类型而异，与其他生计类型相比，觅食者占据的净初级生产力栖息地并没有显著降低。这些结果不支持MHH。最后，我们讨论了使用现代人种学数据集来解决MHH的局限性，并提出了可能仍然相关的替代方法。
Anthropologists often assert that modern hunter-gatherer societies have been relegated to marginal habitats compared to their agricultural neighbors, with the implication that modern social organization and behavior provide little insight into Paleolithic hunter-gatherers. We refer to this idea as the marginal habitat hypothesis (MHH). Despite widespread use of the term 'marginal,' there is little consensus as to what comprises a low quality habitat for humans. Here we reassess the MHH by comparing the net primary productivity (NPP) of habitats occupied by, and the population density (PD) of, a sample of 186 pre-industrial societies (foragers, horticulturalists, intensive agriculturalists, and pastoralists). We found that the nature of the NPP-PD relationship varied by subsistence type, and that foragers did not occupy significantly lower net primary productivity habitats compared to other subsistence types. These results do not support the MHH. We conclude by discussing the limitations of using modern ethnographic datasets to address the MHH and suggest alternative ways in which it may still be relevant.