A high-calorie diet providing adequate fats was a crucial requirement

A high-calorie diet providing adequate fats was a crucial requirement for the evolution of the anatomically modern human brain
Food resources that could support such a diet were most abundant and reliable in the shore environments that were available to early humans. Nevertheless, the human brain's evolution took place almost exclusively in savanna and woodland areas.

Discrepancy - Food resources that could support brain development were most abundant in shore env but the evolution actually took place exclusively in non shore env. Why? Why did it not take place in shore env.
Note that the argument does not say that the said resources were not available in non-shore environments. Just that they were the most abundant in shore env. Then it does logically follow that the evolution should have been highest in shore env too. But that was not the case. Why?

(A) Early humans had a significantly lower metabolic rate than anatomically modern humans, allowing them to expend their fat reserves more efficiently.

There is no comparison needed between early and modern humans' metabolic rate. The question is why shore env early humans' brain not evolve while that of non shore env early humans' did.

(B) The brains of the earliest known humans were 30 percent smaller than the anatomically modern human brain.

We know that the earliest human's brain evolved to modern human's brain. How much was the increase in size doesn't help answer our question.

(C) Prehistoric savanna and woodland areas offered more reliable and abundant resources than they do today.

Distinction is not between early and modern areas. It is between early shore areas and early non-shore areas.

(D) The techniques used to explore the archaeology of prehistoric shore sites have only recently been developed.

Even if they have been recently discovered, they have already been discovered and it has been established that "evolution took place almost exclusively in savanna and woodland areas".

(E) Gathering food in shore environments required a significantly greater expenditure of calories by early humans than did gathering food in other environments.

This helps. Even though shore env had abundant appropriate food resources (say fish and other food sources from the ocean), gathering food here required much greater expenditure of calories (say for fishing) so it was harder to gather food here. Even if it was gathered, the requirement of calories was far more because calories were expended in gathering food. So extra calories may not have been available to early humans living at the shore to help in their brain evolution.
This explains why evolution may have taken place exclusively in some non-shore areas.

Answer (E)

The apparent conflict in the passage is that although a high-calorie diet with fats was crucial for the evolution of the modern human brain, such resources were most abundant in shore environments, yet the human brain's evolution occurred primarily in savanna and woodland areas.

To resolve this conflict, we need to find information that explains why early humans did not primarily evolve in the shore environments despite the abundance of resources there. Let's evaluate each option:

(A) Early humans had a significantly lower metabolic rate than anatomically modern humans, allowing them to expend their fat reserves more efficiently.
- This option doesn't address the apparent conflict in the passage regarding the choice of environment for brain evolution.

(B) The brains of the earliest known humans were 30 percent smaller than the anatomically modern human brain.
- This information provides a comparison of brain sizes but doesn't explain the choice of environment for brain evolution.

(C) Prehistoric savanna and woodland areas offered more reliable and abundant resources than they do today.
- This option doesn't directly address why the brain evolution took place in savanna and woodland areas despite the availability of resources in shore environments.

(D) The techniques used to explore the archaeology of prehistoric shore sites have only recently been developed.
- This option is unrelated to the reasons for the choice of environment for brain evolution.

(E) Gathering food in shore environments required a significantly greater expenditure of calories by early humans than did gathering food in other environments.
- This option provides a potential explanation for the apparent conflict. If gathering food in shore environments required more calories, it could explain why early humans primarily evolved in savanna and woodland areas where gathering food might have been more efficient in terms of calorie expenditure.

Option (E) is the most relevant to resolving the apparent conflict, as it provides a plausible reason for the choice of environment despite the availability of resources in shore environments. Therefore, (E) is the most helpful in resolving the conflict presented in the passage.