托福阅读真题第97篇Why_Did_Agriculture_Begin_（答案文章最后）

托福阅读真题第97篇Why_Did_Agriculture_Begin_（答案
文章最后）
Transitions from a glacial to interglacial world occurred many times during the last two million years. Through all but the most recent glaciation, people moved in response to environmental changes rather than staying put and adapting to a new ecosystem. Then,after living on the move for more than a million years, they started to settle down and become farmers. What was so different when the glaciers melted this last time that caused people to adopt a new lifestyle?
Several explanations have been offered to account for this radical change. Some argue that the shift from a cool, wet glacial climate to less hospitable conditions put an environmental squeeze on early people in the Middle East. In this view, hunters began growing plants in order to survive when the climate warmed and herds of wild game dwindled. Others argue that agriculture evolved in response to an inevitable process of cultural evolution without any specific environmental pressure. Whatever the reasons, agriculture developed independently in Mesopotamia, northern hina, and Mesoamerica.
For much of the last century, theories for the origin of agriculture emphasized the competing oasis and cultural evolution hypotheses. The oasis hypothesis held that the postglacial drying of the Middle East restricted edible plants, people, and other animals to well- watered flood plains.This forced proximity promoted social bonds, which eventually led to domestication. In contrast, the cultural evolution hypothesis holds that regional environmental change was unimportant in the gradual adoption of agriculture through an inevitable
progression of social development. Unfortunately, neither hypothesis provides satisfying answers for why agriculture arose when and where it did.
fundamental problem with the oasis theory is that the wild ancestors of our modern grains came to the Middle East from northern frica at the end of the last glaciation. This means that the variety of food resources available to people in the Middle East was expanding at the time that agriculture arose-the opposite of the oasis theory. So the story cannot be as simple as the idea that people, plants, and animals crowded into shrinking oases as the countryside dried.nd because only certain people in the Middle East adopted agriculture, the cultural evolution hypothesis falls short.griculture was not simply an inevitable stage on the road from hunting and gathering to more advanced societies.
The transition to an agricultural society was a remarkable and puzzling behavioral adaptation. fter the peak of the last glaciation, people herded gazelles in Syria and Israel. Subsisting on these herds required less effort than planting, weeding, and tending domesticated crops. Similarly, in entral merica several hours spent gathering wild corn could provide food for a week. If agriculture was more difficult and time-consuming than hunting and gathering, why did people take it up in the first place?
Increasing population density provides an attractive explanation for the origin and spread of agriculture. When hunting and gathering groups grew beyond the capacity of their territory to support them, part of the group would split off and move to a new territory.Once there was no more productive territory to colonize, growing populations developed more intensive (and time-consuming) ways to extract a living from
their environment. Such pressures favored groups that could produce food themselves to get more out of the land. In this view, agriculture can be understood as a natural behavioral response to increasing population.
Modern studies have shown that wild strains of wheat and barley can be readily cultivated with simple methods. lthough this ease of cultivation suggests that agriculture could have originated many times in many places, genetic analyses show that modern strains of wheat, peas, and lentils all came from a small sample of wild varieties. omestication of plants fundamental to our modern diet occurred in just a few places and times when people began to more intensively exploit what had until then been secondary resources.
1.Transitions from a glacial to interglacial world occurred many times during the last two million years. Through all but the most recent glaciation, people moved in response to environmental changes rather than staying put and adapting to a new ecosystem. Then,after living on the move for more than a million years, they started to settle down and become farmers. What was so different when the glaciers melted this last time that caused people to adopt a new lifestyle?
2.Several explanations have been offered to account for this radical change. Some argue that the shift from a cool, wet glacial climate to less hospitable conditions put an environmental squeeze on early people in the Middle East. In this view, hunters began growing plants in order to survive when the climate warmed and herds of wild game dwindled. Others argue that agriculture evolved in response to an inevitable process of cultural evolution without any specific environmental pressure. Whatever the reasons, agriculture developed independently in
Mesopotamia, northern hina, and Mesoamerica.
3.Several explanations have been offered to account for this radical change. Some argue that the shift from a cool, wet glacial climate to less hospitable conditions put an environmental squeeze on early people in the Middle East. In this view, hunters began growing plants in order to survive when the climate warmed and herds of wild game dwindled. Others argue that agriculture evolved in response to an inevitable process of cultural evolution without any specific environmental pressure. Whatever the reasons, agriculture developed independently in Mesopotamia, northern hina, and Mesoamerica.
4.For much of the last century, theories for the origin of agriculture emphasized the competing oasis and cultural evolution hypotheses. The oasis hypothesis held that the postglacial drying of the Middle East restricted edible plants, people, and other animals to well- watered flood plains.This forced proximity promoted social bonds, which eventually led to domestication. In contrast, the cultural evolution hypothesis holds that regional environmental change was unimportant in the gradual adoption of agriculture through an inevitable progression of social development. Unfortunately, neither hypothesis provides satisfying answers for why agriculture arose when and where it did.
5. fundamental problem with the oasis theory is that the wild ancestors of our modern grains came to the Middle East from northern frica at the end of the last glaciation. This means that the variety of food resources available to people in the Middle East was expanding at the time that agriculture arose-the opposite of the oasis theory. So the story cannot be as simple as the idea that people, plants, and animals crowded into shrinking
oases as the countryside dried.nd because only certain people in the Middle East adopted agriculture, the cultural evolution hypothesis falls short.griculture was not simply an inevitable stage on the road from hunting and gathering to more advanced societies.
6.The transition to an agricultural society was a remarkable and puzzling behavioral adaptation. fter the peak of the last glaciation, people herded gazelles in Syria and Israel. Subsisting on these herds required less effort than planting, weeding, and tending domesticated crops. Similarly, in entral merica several hours spent gathering wild corn could provide food for a week. If agriculture was more difficult and time-consuming than hunting and gathering, why did people take it up in the first place?
7.The transition to an agricultural society was a remarkable and puzzling behavioral adaptation. fter the peak of the last glaciation, people herded gazelles in Syria and Israel. Subsisting on these herds required less effort than planting, weeding, and tending domesticated crops. Similarly, in entral merica several hours spent gathering wild corn could provide food for a week. If agriculture was more difficult and time-consuming than hunting and gathering, why did people take it up in the first place?
8.Increasing population density provides an attractive explanation for the origin and spread of agriculture. When hunting and gathering groups grew beyond the capacity of their territory to support them, part of the group would split off and move to a new territory.Once there was no more productive territory to colonize, growing populations developed more intensive (and time-consuming) ways to extract a living from their environment. Such pressures favored groups that could produce food themselves to get more out of the land. In this view,
agriculture can be understood as a natural behavioral response to increasing population.
9.Increasing population density provides an attractive explanation for the origin and spread of agriculture. ⬛When hunting and gathering groups grew beyond the capacity of their territory to support them, part of the group would split off and move to a new territory.⬛Once there was no more productive territory to colonize, growing populations developed more intensive (and time-consuming) ways to extract a living from their environment.⬛Such pressures favored groups that could produce food themselves to get more out of the land. In this view, agriculture can be understood as a natural⬛behavioral response to increasing population.
10.。