Eric Michael Johnson | University of British Columbia (original) (raw)

Papers by Eric Michael Johnson

Twentieth-century scholars have interpreted the Russian famine of 1891 as a Malthusian crisis. As... more Twentieth-century scholars have interpreted the Russian famine of 1891 as a Malthusian crisis. As the rural population expanded a ‘demographic revolution’ took place that overran land resources and outstripped food production. A crop failure then resulted in famine and the loss of an estimated 500,000 lives. However, a meta-analysis suggests that the crisis was not a failure of food availability, but a failure of food entitlements. Government records show that the amount of grain available nationwide had increased despite the crop failure, but rising costs put it out of reach for those most in need. Prior to the crisis, rapid industrialization had disrupted the traditional agricultural existence for many rural provinces and labour migration was crucial for supplementing rural income. The average migration rate between 1881–90 for the twelve Russian provinces most affected by the famine was inversely correlated with the increased death rate following the crop failure. By understanding the demographic causes for the entitlement failure that precipitated the 1891 famine, we can better understand the conditions that led to the downfall of tsarism in Russia.

The social brain hypothesis proposes that haplorhine primates have evolved relatively large brain... more The social brain hypothesis proposes that haplorhine primates have evolved relatively large brains for their body size primarily as an adaptation for living in complex social groups. Studies that support this hypothesis have shown a strong relationship between relative brain size and group size in these taxa. Recent reports suggest that this pattern is unique to haplorhine primates; many nonprimate taxa do not show a relationship between group size and relative brain size. Rather, pairbonded social monogamy appears to be a better predictor of a large relative brain size in many nonprimate taxa. It has been suggested that haplorhine primates may have expanded the pairbonded relationship beyond simple dyads towards the evolution of complex social groups. We examined the relationship between group size, pairbonding, and relative brain size in a sample of 19 lemurs; strepsirrhine primates that last share a common ancestor with monkeys and apes approximately 75 Ma. First, we evaluated the social brain hypothesis, which predicts that species with larger social groups will have relatively larger brains. Secondly, we tested the pairbonded hypothesis, which predicts that species with a pairbonded social organization will have relatively larger brains than non-pairbonded species. We found no relationship between group size or pairbonding and relative brain size in lemurs. We conducted two further analyses to test for possible relationships between two nonsocial variables, activity pattern and diet, and relative brain size. Both diet and activity pattern are significantly associated with relative brain size in our sample. Specifically, frugivorous species have relatively larger brains than folivorous species, and cathemeral species have relatively larger brains than diurnal, but not nocturnal species. These findings highlight meaningful differences between Malagasy strepsirrhines and haplorhines, and between Malagasy strepsirrhines and nonprimate taxa, regarding the social and ecological factors associated with increases in relative brain size. The results suggest that factors such as foraging complexity and flexibility of activity patterns may have driven selection for increases in brain size in lemurs.

Let's face it, as a species we're obsessed with ourselves. The vast majority of us spend our days... more Let's face it, as a species we're obsessed with ourselves. The vast majority of us spend our days at work or school where a considerable amount of time is taken up not discussing the important issues of the day, but rather the juicy details of one another's personal lives. Then we go home only to sign on to social network services like Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ and continue where we left off. In this respect we're fairly typical primates.

Talks by Eric Michael Johnson

Twentieth-century scholarship has framed the Russian famine of 1891 in largely Malthusian terms. ... more Twentieth-century scholarship has framed the Russian famine of 1891 in largely Malthusian terms. According to this interpretation, as the rural population expanded in the Central and Eastern Agricultural Regions a “demographic revolution” took place that overran land resources and outstripped food production. A crop failure then resulted in famine and the loss of an estimated 500,000 lives. Climate data and documentary records are consistent with the interpretation that a convergence of Azores and Arctic anticyclones precipitated a crop failure. However, a meta-analysis reveals that the crisis was not a failure of food availability, but a failure of food entitlements. Government records show that the amount of grain available nationwide had increased despite the crop failure, but high cost put it out of reach for those most in need. Prior to the crisis, rapid industrialization had disrupted the traditional agricultural existence for many rural provinces and labor migration was crucial for supplementing rural income. Provinces within proximity to industrial development were able to supplement their agricultural income and improve their maximum entitlement. However, the average migration rate between 1881-1890 for the twelve Russian provinces most affected by the famine was inversely correlated with the percent of increase in death rate following the crop failure. In contrast to the Malthusian explanation, the famine merely exposed already existing fault lines of economic inequality. By understanding the demographic causes of this entitlement failure that resulted in famine, we can better understand the conditions that led to the downfall of Tsarism in Russia.