Lambda Alpha Journal, v.31, 2001

Permanent URI for this collection

The Lambda Alpha Journal is a publication of student papers by members of the Lambda Alpha National Honor Society and is published regularly at Wichita State University, Department of Anthropology, 1845 Fairmount, Box 52, Wichita, KS 67260-0052. Professional, avocational, student manuscripts, and book reviews of recent publications are welcome. The journal is made possible through the efforts of the Journal editorial staff residing at the founding chapter, Alpha of Kansas. Funding for the Journal is obtained through subscriptions and continuing sponsorship by the Student Government Association of Wichita State University.

Editor-in-Chief : Dr. Peer H. Moore-Jansen


Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 10
  • Item
    A possible index to distinguish between Canis latrans and Canis familiaris
    (Wichita State University. Department of Anthropology, 2001) Calaway, Miranda
    The crania of Canis latrans (coyote) and Canis familiaris (dog) are morphologically similar and can be confusing when trying to differentiate between the two. Dogs and coyotes have similar origins that go back into the Oligocene. The hespaeocyon is the extinct creature that gave rise to all canids (Colbert 1958:68). Hence, many canid skulls look very similar in structure. There is a definite distinction between dogs and other canids. In compared patterns of intracranial allometry and morphological diversity between domestic dog and wild canid species, domestic dogs were shown to be morphologically distinct from all others except wolf like canids (Wayne 1985:247). Dogs having a similarity to wolflike canids can be explained by the theory that dogs are descended from wolves. Some of the morphological changes that occurred in the domestication are size reduction, shortening of facial region, and paedomorphism (retention of juvenile characteristics) (Morey 1992:182). Coyotes evolved separately from wolves and dogs. Coyotes are more related to foxes than wolves and a have a more generalized biology than the other canid counterparts. They have narrower skulls than wolves and the jaws have not developed as wide as the wolves, which, in the case of dogs compromises gripping power (Nowak 1978:5). In his paper "Distinction between the skulls of coyotes and dogs," Krantz (1959) gives an excellent description of gross morphological differences between dogs and coyotes. The Coyote has the following characteristics -- A longer narrower muzzle, small frontal sinus, s-shaped zygo-maxillary suture, a vertical posterior border of coronoid process, a plane of palate that would miss skull if extended, the space between the auditory bulla is narrower than either bulla, internal nares are in line or slightly forward of second molars, the anterior palatine foramen is three or four times long as it is wide, the lower first molar rear cusp is the same size as the other two, the second, third, and fourth premolars are three times long as they are wide, and the coyote has a straight tooth row. The dog has a shorter wider snout, tooth row that bends outward, often has teeth missing, pronounced bulge over occipital orbits, straight zygo-maxillary suture, the posterior coronoid process extends backwards at the tip, the plane ofthe palate would hit the skull, the space between the auditory bulla are wider than the bulla, internal nare usually extend to a point behind second molars, anterior palatine foramen two times as long as it is wide, lower first molar rear cusps differ in size, and the second, third, and fourth premolars are three times long as they are wide. Craniometric differences exist as well. If the molar tooth row is 3.1 or more times that of a palatal width, the specimen is a coyote. If the molar tooth row is 2.7 times or less, the specimen is a dog. (Howard 1949:170) Despite all these differences confusion may still arise when differentiating between the two species, especially if the cranium is incomplete, or if the characteristics look like they could belong to dog or coyote. More craniometric evaluations may be utilized to establish mathematical guidelines for distinguishing the two species and the evolutionary processes. Additional indexes would be helpful in defining the correct species and establishing evolutionary relationships.
  • Item
    Cooperative breeding: an integrative approach
    (Wichita State University. Department of Anthropology, 2001) Shah, Nishant Hasmukh
  • Item
    Redefining sickle cell anemia in African American communities.
    (Wichita State University. Department of Anthropology, 2001) Meyappan, Janaki
    Sickle cell disease (SCD) affects lout of 600 African American individuals at birth. More than 50,000 African Americans have it today. It is a genetic disorder that affects an individual's hemoglobin and has deleterious effects on an individual's life (Steinberg 1999). Many studies have been done to see the medical effects of sickle cell anemia yet it is interesting to unpack the disease and its relevance within a particular population. The primary objective of this analysis is the study of African-American mothers of children with sickle cell disease and the ways in which they react to the diagnosis and manage healthcare of their children. The mothers in the study are the primary caregivers for their children and they are active participants, creators, and definers of the social world in which they live. The meanings they construct and assign to the sickle cell disease experience develop from their own values, resources and life experience and thus differ from the meanings medical experts assign to the disease.
  • Item
    Letter from the Editor
    (Wichita State University. Department of Anthropology, 2001) Moore-Jansen, Peer H.
  • Item
    Determining form and function: an analysis of use-related wear on Strombus gigas shell tools.
    (Wichita State University. Department of Anthropology, 2001) Peters, Eric D.
    The objective ofthis paper is to present the findings of author's research on shell artifacts in southeast Florida. Collected data comes from the analysis of 21 Strom bus gigas shell tools in the collection of the Anthropology Department at Florida Atlantic University. These samples were recovered from the Boca Weir and Jupiter Inlet sites, both of which are representative of a southeast Florida village complex. A Strom bus gigas shell artifact typology is presented along with supporting analysis of macrolmicrowear variables. The methods of Masson (1988), Eaton (1974), Keegan (1984), and Andrefsky (1998) serve as a framework and source of reference for this study.
Copyright by Lambda Alpha Journal. All rights reserved.