DOCSLIB.ORG

Enamel Distribution Patterns of Extant Human and Hominoid Molars: Occlusal Versus Lateral Enamel Thickness

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Enamel Distribution Patterns of Extant Human and Hominoid Molars: Occlusal Versus Lateral Enamel Thickness Bull. Natl. Mus. Nat. Sci., Ser. D, 34 pp. 1–9, December 22, 2008 Enamel Distribution Patterns of Extant Human and Hominoid Molars: Occlusal versus lateral enamel thickness Reiko T. Kono1 and Gen Suwa2 1 Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Nature and Science, Hyakunincho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 169–0073 Japan E-mail: [email protected] 2 The University Museum, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113–0033 Japan E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Enamel thickness and distribution of the molar crown are important in the study of hominoid and hominid evolution. This is because the 3-dimensional distribution pattern of enamel within the molar crown has been recognized to have significant functional, developmental, and phylogenetic information. In order to analyze aspects of enamel distribution patterns, we quantified average enamel thicknesses separately in the occlusal basin and lateral molar crown, and compared extant great ape and modern human patterns. Interspecific comparisons show that, among modern apes and humans, chimpanzees and bonobos share a unique pattern of molar enamel distribution, in which the occlusal basin enamel is unexpectedly thin. Other taxa share a common enamel distri- bution pattern, greater occlusal than lateral crown average thicknesses, despite the wide range of absolute and relative whole-crown thicknesses. We hypothesize that thin occlusal enamel is a shared derived feature of the genus Pan, possibly an adaptation to relatively soft-fruit frugivory. Key words : Enamel thickness, Hominoid, Molar, Occlusal fovea increase in the application of micro-CT technolo- Introduction gy, a series of investigations has now been pub- Average enamel thickness was initially defined lished that report comparable 3D measures of in 2-dimensional cross sections of molars as AET (Smith et al., 2006; Olejniczak et al., enamel area divided by enamel-dentine junction 2008a, b, c, d). (EDJ) length (Martin, 1983). It was devised as a In these studies, AET is presented as a more convenient method of describing and comparing appropriate measure of overall enamel thickness overall thickness of the enamel cap and has been than the conventional 2-dimensional version of the standard method of describing enamel thick- Martin (1983), a point that we agree with (e.g., ness until recently (e.g., Dean and Schrenk, Kono, 2004). However, there are some differ- 2003; Martin et al., 2003; Smith et al., 2003, ences between some of our results, such as with 2004, 2005). We first reported volumetric and Pongo. We are not sure yet if this stems from surface area measures of enamel and dentin por- small sample biases, different populational or tions of the crown (Kono et al., 2002), and pro- subspecies representations of our respective ceeded to compare modern human and extant species samples (see also discussion in Ole- great ape molars by means of the 3-dimensional jniczak et al., 2008b), and/or methodological dis- (3D) version of Martin’s (1983) average enamel crepancies such as in defining the cervix for thickness, that is, enamel volume divided by EDJ measurement. surface area (variable AET) (Kono, 2002; Kono, Aside from the 3D-based quantification of 2004). Subsequent to this work, with the rapid overall enamel thickness, it has been recognized 2 Table1. Descriptive statistics of the 3-dimensional average enamel thickness variables. AET OAET LAET Species Tooth n Mean SD Range Mean SD Range Mean SD Range Homo sapiens LM1 9 1.314 0.125 1.065–1.512 1.531 0.144 1.280–1.805 1.239 0.124 0.986–1.417 LM2 9 1.283 0.135 1.071–1.507 1.600 0.201 1.324–1.875 1.168 0.124 0.941–1.359 LM3 3 1.210 0.172 1.019–1.352 1.466 0.197 1.283–1.675 1.113 0.163 0.925–1.226 UM1 3 1.405 0.067 1.345–1.478 1.627 0.136 1.495–1.767 1.326 0.041 1.290–1.371 UM2 3 1.456 0.180 1.256–1.604 1.788 0.273 1.474–1.968 1.337 0.144 1.179–1.460 UM3 3 1.195 0.114 1.064–1.266 1.479 0.124 1.350–1.598 1.095 0.102 0.981–1.177 Pan troglodytes LM1 9 0.787 0.058 0.709–0.869 0.738 0.110 0.546–0.863 0.809 0.054 0.710–0.880 andGenSuwa Kono T. Reiko LM2 7 0.816 0.058 0.752–0.894 0.754 0.066 0.665–0.824 0.843 0.084 0.775–0.995 LM3 1 0.798 0.790 0.801 UM1 5 0.851 0.141 0.691–1.031 0.810 0.139 0.671–0.959 0.870 0.146 0.690–1.065 UM2 7 0.807 0.091 0.713–0.940 0.749 0.096 0.586–0.846 0.832 0.107 0.690–0.985 UM3 1 0.904 0.963 0.875 Pan paniscus LM1 7 0.729 0.071 0.627–0.799 0.714 0.071 0.616–0.809 0.736 0.074 0.629–0.808 LM2 5 0.804 0.136 0.627–0.991 0.740 0.177 0.475–0.951 0.837 0.118 0.707–1.012 LM3 — UM1 6 0.680 0.090 0.566–0.786 0.668 0.074 0.551–0.746 0.685 0.099 0.567–0.803 UM2 4 0.726 0.085 0.610–0.814 0.711 0.106 0.558–0.791 0.734 0.080 0.633–0.824 UM3 — Pongo pygmaeus LM1 3 0.963 0.145 0.839–1.122 1.155 0.128 1.064–1.301 0.886 0.155 0.748–1.053 LM2 3 1.061 0.097 1.004–1.173 1.251 0.079 1.161–1.310 0.978 0.115 0.891–1.108 LM3 — UM1 1 0.897 0.993 0.860 UM2 1 1.075 1.207 1.014 UM3 — Gorilla gorilla LM1 3 0.889 0.121 0.763–1.004 1.015 0.164 0.856–1.182 0.840 0.102 0.730–0.932 LM2 3 1.089 0.086 1.016–1.183 1.220 0.073 1.163–1.303 1.027 0.091 0.951–1.128 LM3 1 1.232 1.359 1.164 UM1 1 0.880 0.990 0.840 UM2 1 1.051 1.227 0.976 UM3 1 1.223 1.448 1.121 Occlusal versus Lateral Enamel Thickness of Hominoid Molars 3 that the 3D distribution pattern of enamel within face (see below). the crown would have significant functional, de- In the present study, we report the values of re- velopmental, and phylogenetic information (e.g., gional AETs separated into occlusal basin and Kono et al., 2002; Kono, 2004; Suwa and Kono, the lateral crown face portions. Comparisons are 2005; Suwa et al., 2007; Olejniczak, 2008a, d). also made with the whole crown AET. The enam- In contrast to earlier studies in 2-dimensions (e.g., el distribution characteristics of the extant homi- Schwartz, 2000), we investigated 2D-based linear noid species will be discussed from these per- measures of enamel thickness in some detail, and spectives. found that occlusal and some definitions of later- al enamel thicknesses were methodologically un- Materials stable, and potentially misleading in characteriz- ing both local and overall regional enamel thick- A hominoid sample consisting of permanent nesses (Suwa and Kono, 2005; Kono and Suwa, molars of Pan troglodytes (nϭ30), Pan paniscus 2005). Therefore, 3D-based measures of enamel (nϭ22), Gorilla gorilla (nϭ10), Pongo pyg- thickness, of various molar regions of interest, maeus (nϭ8), and thirty permanent molars of are highly sought, which, so far, has been at- Japanese Homo sapiens from Jomon (nϭ10), tempted only by the Kono (2004) study. In partic- Yayoi (nϭ1), Kamakura (nϭ1), and Edo periods ular, that study quantified a contrast between (nϭ18) were analyzed in this study. Sex is un- enamel thickness of the occlusal fovea and the known for most of the specimens, since they lateral crown, with Pan troglodytes and Pongo were taken from juvenile individuals. pygmaeus molars exhibiting comparatively thin The chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutan teeth and thick occlusal enamel, respectively. Recently, are mostly from the collection of the Cleveland occlusal thickness of the enamel has gained at- Museum of Natural History. The bonobo speci- tention from a functional standpoint, as a poten- mens are from the collection of the Royal Muse- tial adaptation to withstanding occlusal forces in- um of Central Africa, Tervuren. A small part of duced by mastication of hard and large food ob- the chimpanzee and orangutan molars are housed jects (e.g., Lucas et al., 2008; Vogel et al., 2008). either at the University of California, Berkeley, In our first attempt to quantify regional enamel The University Museum, The University of distribution patterns within a molar (Kono, 2002, Tokyo, or National Museum of Nature and Sci- 2004), overall enamel thickness within the oc- ence, Tokyo. The Jomon Japanese molars were clusal fovea and the lateral face of each cusp was taken from the skeletal collection housed in The represented by the mean value of minimum University Museum, The University of Tokyo. enamel thickness from each pixel of the outer The Yayoi, Kamakura and Edo period specimens enamel surface in the adopted projected orienta- derive from the skeletal collections housed in the tion of view (for details, see Kono, 2004).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Evolution: a Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H
    PHYSICAL (BIOLOGICAL) ANTHROPOLOGY - Human Evolution: A Paleoanthropological Perspective - F.H. Smith HUMAN EVOLUTION: A PALEOANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE F.H. Smith Department of Anthropology, Loyola University Chicago, USA Keywords: Human evolution, Miocene apes, Sahelanthropus, australopithecines, Australopithecus afarensis, cladogenesis, robust australopithecines, early Homo, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Australopithecus africanus/Australopithecus garhi, mitochondrial DNA, homology, Neandertals, modern human origins, African Transitional Group. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Reconstructing Biological History: The Relationship of Humans and Apes 3. The Human Fossil Record: Basal Hominins 4. The Earliest Definite Hominins: The Australopithecines 5. Early Australopithecines as Primitive Humans 6. The Australopithecine Radiation 7. Origin and Evolution of the Genus Homo 8. Explaining Early Hominin Evolution: Controversy and the Documentation- Explanation Controversy 9. Early Homo erectus in East Africa and the Initial Radiation of Homo 10. After Homo erectus: The Middle Range of the Evolution of the Genus Homo 11. Neandertals and Late Archaics from Africa and Asia: The Hominin World before Modernity 12. The Origin of Modern Humans 13. Closing Perspective Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary UNESCO – EOLSS The basic course of human biological history is well represented by the existing fossil record, although there is considerable debate on the details of that history. This review details both what is firmly understood (first echelon issues) and what is contentious concerning humanSAMPLE evolution. Most of the coCHAPTERSntention actually concerns the details (second echelon issues) of human evolution rather than the fundamental issues. For example, both anatomical and molecular evidence on living (extant) hominoids (apes and humans) suggests the close relationship of African great apes and humans (hominins). That relationship is demonstrated by the existing hominoid fossil record, including that of early hominins.
    [Show full text]
  • Full Issue 114
    South African Journal of Science volume 114 number 5/6 Decolonising engineering in South Africa The Grootfontein aquifer: Governance of a hydro-social system Household food waste disposal in South Africa South African behavioural ecology research in a global perspective Volume 114 EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Number 5/6 John Butler-Adam Academy of Science of South Africa May/June 2018 MANAGING EDITOR Linda Fick Academy of Science of South Africa South African ONLINE PUBLISHING Journal of Science SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR Nadine Wubbeling Academy of Science of South Africa ONLINE PUBLISHING ADMINISTRATOR Sbonga Dlamini eISSN: 1996-7489 Academy of Science of South Africa ASSOCIATE EDITORS Nicolas Beukes Leader Department of Geology, University of Johannesburg The Fourth Industrial Revolution and education John Butler-Adam .................................................................................................................... 1 Chris Chimimba Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria Book Review Towards human development friendly universities Linda Chisholm Merridy Wilson-Strydom .......................................................................................................... 2 Centre for Education Rights and Transformation, University of A new look at Old Fourlegs Johannesburg Brian W. van Wilgen ................................................................................................................. 4 Teresa Coutinho Department of Microbiology and Commentary Plant Pathology, University of Pretoria Decolonising
    [Show full text]
  • Class 2: Early Hominids
    Earliest Hominins CHARLES J VELLA, PHD JULY 25 2018 This is latest theory of how Lucy died! We are Mammals 3 defining mammalian traits: hair, mammary glands, homeothermy Mammalian traits show an adaptation for adaptability Miocene era: 23 to 5 Ma, Warmer global period • Ape grade: Planet of the apes • Over 30 genera and 100 species of ape – compared with 6 today • Location: Africa and Eurasia Proconsul: 25 to 23 Ma, during Miocene; arboreal quadruped Primates • Larger body size • Larger brain • Complete stereoscopic vision • Longer gestation, infancy, life span • More k-selected (tend towards single offspring) • Greater dependency on learned behavior • More social Great Apes Bonobos and Chimps split ~1 Ma Superfamily: Hominoidea Gibbons, Gorillas, Orangutan, Chimpanzee, Human Greater encephalization (brain to body ratio) = smarter larger body, brachiation, social complexity, lack of tail Why did Newt Gingrich recommend this book to all new politicians? Detailed and thoroughly engrossing account of ape rivalries and coalitions. Machiavellianism: political behavior is rooted at a level of development that is below the cognitive and is as much instinctive as it is learned. de Waal 1982 De Waal: Machiavellian IQ Machiavelli's The Prince: Frans de Waal introduced the term 'Machiavellian Intelligence' to describe the social and political behavior of chimpanzees Social behaviors: reconciliation, alliance, and sabotage Tactical deception in primates: Vervet monkeys use false predator alarm calls to get extra food Chimpanzees use deception to mate with females belonging to alpha male Chimpanzee cultures • Chimp Cultures: shared behaviors in different communities: • pounding actions • fishing; • probing; • forcing • comfort behavior • miscellaneous exploitation of vegetation properties • exploitation of leaf properties; • grooming; • attention-getting.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Primates
    AccessScience from McGraw-Hill Education Page 1 of 16 www.accessscience.com Fossil primates Contributed by: Eric Delson Publication year: 2014 Extinct members of the order of mammals to which humans belong. All current classifications divide the living primates into two major groups (suborders): the Strepsirhini or “lower” primates (lemurs, lorises, and bushbabies) and the Haplorhini or “higher” primates [tarsiers and anthropoids (New and Old World monkeys, greater and lesser apes, and humans)]. Some fossil groups (omomyiforms and adapiforms) can be placed with or near these two extant groupings; however, there is contention whether the Plesiadapiformes represent the earliest relatives of primates and are best placed within the order (as here) or outside it. See also: FOSSIL; MAMMALIA; PHYLOGENY; PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY; PRIMATES. Vast evidence suggests that the order Primates is a monophyletic group, that is, the primates have a common genetic origin. Although several peculiarities of the primate bauplan (body plan) appear to be inherited from an inferred common ancestor, it seems that the order as a whole is characterized by showing a variety of parallel adaptations in different groups to a predominantly arboreal lifestyle, including anatomical and behavioral complexes related to improved grasping and manipulative capacities, a variety of locomotor styles, and enlargement of the higher centers of the brain. Among the extant primates, the lower primates more closely resemble forms that evolved relatively early in the history of the order, whereas the higher primates represent a group that evolved more recently (Fig. 1). A classification of the primates, as accepted here, appears above. Early primates The earliest primates are placed in their own semiorder, Plesiadapiformes (as contrasted with the semiorder Euprimates for all living forms), because they have no direct evolutionary links with, and bear few adaptive resemblances to, any group of living primates.
    [Show full text]
  • Hominid Adaptations and Extinctions Reviewed by MONTE L. Mccrossin
    Hominid Adaptations and Extinctions David W. Cameron Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 2004, 260 pp. (hardback), $60.00. ISBN 0-86840-716-X Reviewed by MONTE L. McCROSSIN Department of Sociology and Anthropology, New Mexico State University, P.O. Box 30001, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA; [email protected] According to David W. Cameron, the goal of his book Asian and African great apes), and the subfamily Gorillinae Hominid Adaptations and Extinctions is “to examine the (Graecopithecus). Cameron states that “the aim of this book, evolution of ape morphological form in association with however, is to re-examine and if necessary revise this ten- adaptive strategies and to understand what were the envi- tative evolutionary scheme” (p. 10). With regard to his in- ronmental problems facing Miocene ape groups and how clusion of the Proconsulidae in the Hominoidea, Cameron these problems influenced ape adaptive strategies” (p. 4). cites as evidence “the presence of a frontal sinus” and that Cameron describes himself as being “acknowledged inter- “they have an increased potential for raising arms above nationally as an expert on hominid evolution” and dedi- the head” (p. 10). Sadly, Cameron seems unaware of the cates the book to his “teachers, colleagues and friends” fact that the frontal sinus has been demonstrated to be a Peter Andrews and Colin Groves. He has participated in primitive feature for Old World higher primates (Rossie et fieldwork at the late Miocene sites of Rudabanya (Hunga- al. 2002). Also, no clear evidence exists for the enhanced ry) and Pasalar (Turkey). His Ph.D. at Australian National arm-raising abilities of proconsulids compared to their University was devoted to “European Miocene faciodental contemporaries, including the victoriapithecids.
    [Show full text]
  • Myriam Hönig
    Press Release Oldest hominin possibly lived in Europe Scientists find 7.2 million year old pre-human remains in the Balkans ‒ New hypothesis about the origin of humankind Public Relations Department Dr. Karl Guido Rijkhoek Director Tübingen, 23 May 2017 Antje Karbe Phone +49 7071 29-76788 The lineages of chimpanzees and humans may have split several +49 7071 29-76789 hundred thousand earlier than hitherto assumed, according to an Fax +49 7071 29-5566 international research team headed by Professor Madelaine Böhme from karl.rijkhoek[at]uni-tuebingen.de the Senckenberg Centre for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment at antje.karbe[at]uni-tuebingen.de the University of Tübingen and Professor Nikolai Spassov from the www.uni-tuebingen.de/aktuell Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The researchers investigated two fossils of Graecopithecus freybergi with state-of-the-art methods and came to Senckenberg Gesellschaft für the conclusion that they belong to pre-humans. Their findings and their Naturforschung new theory, published in two papers this week in the journal Plos One, Press Contact further indicate that the split of the human lineage occurred in the Eastern Dr. Sören Dürr Mediterranean and not – as customarily assumed – in Africa. Leitung The present-day chimpanzees are humans’ nearest living relatives. Judith Jördens Telefon +49 69 7542 1434 Where the last chimp-human common ancestor lived is a central and judith.joerdens[at]senckeberg.de highly debated issue in palaeoanthropology. Researchers have assumed up to now that the lineages diverged five to seven million years ago and pressestelle[at]senckenberg.de www.senckenberg.de/presse that the first pre-humans developed in Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Series N° 33
    33 World Heritage papers Human origin sites and the Heritage World in Africa Convention 33 World Heritage papers HEADWORLD HERITAGES 2 Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Africa For more information contact: UNESCO World Heritage Centre papers 7, place Fontenoy 75352 Paris 07 SP France Tel: 33 (0)1 45 68 18 76 Fax: 33 (0)1 45 68 55 70 E-mail: [email protected] http://whc.unesco.org World HeritageWorld Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Africa Nuria Sanz, Editor Coordinator of the World Heritage/HEADS Programme Table of Contents Published in 2012 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Foreword Page 6 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France Kishore Rao, Director, UNESCO World Heritage Centre © UNESCO 2012 Foreword Page 7 All rights reserved H.E. Amin Abdulkadir, Minister, Ministry of Culture and Tourism Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia ISBN 978-92-3-001081-2 Introduction Page 8 Original title: Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Africa Published in 2012 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Coordination of the HEADS Programme, UNESCO World Heritage Centre The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Outstanding Universal Value of human evolution in Africa Page 13 Yves Coppens The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.
    [Show full text]
  • A Cladistic Analysis of Graecopithecus
    Commentary Page 1 of 2 Response to Benoit and Thackeray (2017): AUTHORS: ‘A cladistic analysis of Graecopithecus’ Jochen Fuss1 Nikolai Spassov2 1 Madelaine Böhme3 Benoit and Thackeray provide a cladistic analysis that aims to refute the hypotheses that Graecopithecus is a member of the hominin clade and that hominins could have originated in the Eastern Mediterranean. In our David R. Begun4 response, we point out that the authors’ thesis relies on a selective use of data and a series of misrepresentations of our results and conclusions that reflect what we see as an a priori hostility to the very idea of a non-African AFFILIATIONS: origin of the hominin clade. 1Senckenberg Centre for Human Evolution It is useful to recall that ever since the widespread acceptance among scientists of the reality of human evolution and Palaeoenvironment, there has been debate, often contentious, about the place of origin of the first humans (hominins). While Darwin Tübingen, Germany and Huxley advocated Africa, Darwin recognised the possibility that it might be Europe – a fact often overlooked 2National Museum of Natural today. Haeckel and Dubois believed it was Asia while Dawson profited from the racist ideology of the day to History, Bulgarian Academy of promote a forgery (Eoanthropus, a.k.a. Piltdown) as proof that it was Europe. Osborn even proposed Nebraska! Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria Following the description by Dart of Australopithecus, and especially the subsequent discoveries by Broom, the 3Department of Geoscience, overwhelming consensus has been that Africa is the continent of hominin origins. This has become so widely Eberhard Karls University of accepted as to rise to the level of dogma, with the result that any claim to the contrary is automatically disputed if Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany not ridiculed.
    [Show full text]
  • Locomotion and Posture from the Common Hominoid Ancestor to Fully Modern Hominins, with Special Reference to the Last Common Panin/Hominin Ancestor R
    J. Anat. (2008) 212, pp501–543 doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2008.00870.x REVIEWBlackwell Publishing Ltd Locomotion and posture from the common hominoid ancestor to fully modern hominins, with special reference to the last common panin/hominin ancestor R. H. Crompton,1 E. E. Vereecke1 and S. K. S. Thorpe2 1School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Liverpool, Sherrington Buildings, Ashton Street, Liverpool L69 3GE, UK 2School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT Abstract Based on our knowledge of locomotor biomechanics and ecology we predict the locomotion and posture of the last common ancestors of (a) great and lesser apes and their close fossil relatives (hominoids); (b) chimpanzees, bonobos and modern humans (hominines); and (c) modern humans and their fossil relatives (hominins). We evaluate our propositions against the fossil record in the context of a broader review of evolution of the locomotor system from the earliest hominoids of modern aspect (crown hominoids) to early modern Homo sapiens. While some early East African stem hominoids were pronograde, it appears that the adaptations which best characterize the crown hominoids are orthogrady and an ability to abduct the arm above the shoulder – rather than, as is often thought, manual suspension sensu stricto. At 7–9 Ma (not much earlier than the likely 4–8 Ma divergence date for panins and hominins, see Bradley, 2008) there were crown hominoids in southern Europe which were adapted to moving in an orthograde posture, supported primarily on the hindlimb, in an arboreal, and possibly for Oreo- pithecus, a terrestrial context. By 7 Ma, Sahelanthropus provides evidence of a Central African hominin, panin or possibly gorilline adapted to orthogrady, and both orthogrady and habitually highly extended postures of the hip are evident in the arboreal East African protohominin Orrorin at 6 Ma.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic, Ontogenetic, and Functional Implications of Hominoid Mandibular Corpus Shape Variation
    Phylogenetic, Ontogenetic, and Functional Implications of Hominoid Mandibular Corpus Shape Variation by Mary Kathleen Pitirri A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Anthropology University of Toronto 2019 Phylogenetic, Ontogenetic, and Functional Implications of Hominoid Mandibular Corpus Shape Variation by Mary Kathleen Pitirri Department of Anthropology University of Toronto 2019 Abstract Mandibular fragments are among the most commonly preserved elements in the primate fossil record. These specimens are often studied through linear measurements of mandibular corpus height and breadth, which are used to calculate mandibular robusticity (MR). Presently, the significance of mandibular corpus variation in both living and fossil hominoids remains unclear. Here, three separate analyses are conducted to develop and evaluate an alternative method to quantify hominoid mandibular corpus shape and to investigate the dietary, phylogenetic and ontogenetic significance of hominoid mandibular corpus shape variation in order to help interpret corpus shape variation in the primate fossil record. These analyses use landmarks and semilandmarks to capture the shape of the outline of the mandibular corpus in cross-section in a sample of extant great apes, corporal cortical bone distribution (CBD) in a sample of extant and fossil hominoids, and to assess ontogenetic changes in corpus shape and the ii relationship between these changes and molar crypt length, breadth and height in a sample of extant hominoids. These results show that quantification and comparison of the shape mandibular corpus in cross-section is a preferred alternative to MR in studying the hominoid fossil record. Additionally, extant hominoids are found to have significant CBD shape differences that are phylogenetically significant and do not match morphological predictions based on diet.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Footprints Challenge Established Theories of Human Evolution 31 August 2017
    Fossil footprints challenge established theories of human evolution 31 August 2017 human-like footprints from Crete, published online this week by an international team of researchers, overthrows this simple picture and suggests a more complex reality. Human feet have a very distinctive shape, different from all other land animals. The combination of a long sole, five short forward-pointing toes without claws, and a hallux ("big toe") that is larger than the other toes, is unique. The feet of our closest relatives, the great apes, look more like a human The footprints were discovered by Gerard Gierlinski (1st hand with a thumb-like hallux that sticks out to the author of the study) by chance when he was on holiday on Crete in 2002. Gierlinski, a paleontologist at the side. The Laetoli footprints, thought to have been Polish Geological Institute specialized in footprints, made by Australopithecus, are quite similar to identified the footprints as mammal but did not interpret those of modern humans except that the heel is them further at the time. In 2010 he returned to the site narrower and the sole lacks a proper arch. By together with Grzegorz Niedzwiedzki (2nd author), a contrast, the 4.4 million year old Ardipithecus Polish paleontologist now at Uppsala University, to study ramidus from Ethiopia, the oldest hominin known the footprints in detail. Together they came to the from reasonably complete fossils, has an ape-like conclusion that the footprints were made by hominins. foot. The researchers who described Ardipithecus Credit: Andrzej Boczarowski argued that it is a direct ancestor of later hominins, implying that a human-like foot had not yet evolved at that time.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Advances on Multidisciplinary Research at Rudabánya, Late Miocene (MN9), Hungary: a Compendium
    Palaeontographia Italica 89 2002 3-36 tavv. Pisa, 2004 Recent Advances on Multidisciplinary Research at Rudabánya, Late Miocene (MN9), Hungary: a compendium RAYMOND L. BERNOR1, LÁSZLÓ KORDOS2, LORENZO ROOK3 JORDI AGUSTÍ4,PETER ANDREWS5, MIRANDA ARMOUR-CHELU6, DAVID R. BEGUN7, DAVID W. C AMERON8, JOHN DAMUTH9, GUDRUN DAXNER-HÖCK10, LOUIS DE BONIS11, OLDRICH FEJFAR12, NARDOS FESSAHA1, MIKAEL FORTELIUS13, JENS FRANZEN14, MIHÁLY GASPARIK15, ALAN GENTRY5, KURT HEISSIG16, GABOR HERNYAK17, THOMAS KAISER18, GEORGE D. KOUFOS19, ENDRE KROLOPP2, DÉNES JÁNOSSY15, MANUEL LLENAS4, LUKÁCS MESZÁROS20, PAL MÜLLER2, PAUL RENNE21, ZBYNEˇK ROčEK22, SEVKET SEN23, ROBERT SCOTT24, ZBIGNIEW SZYNDLAR25, GY. TOPÁL15, PETER S. UNGAR26, TORSTEN UTESCHER27, JAN A. VAN DAM28, LARS WERDELIN29, REINHARD ZIEGLER30 KEY WORDS – Mammal Faunas, Biogeography, Palaeoecology, Late Vallesian, Late Miocene, Rudabánya, Hungary ABSTRACT – Rudabánya is a rich late Miocene fossil locality first exploited for its vertebrate remains by Pethö in 1902. The first fossil primate was discovered by the local Chief Mining Geologist, Gabor Hernyák. Professor Miklos Kretzoi made Rudabánya famous in 1969 by publishing a manuscript on the new hominoid primate, Rudapithecus hungaricus, recognized herein as Dryopithecus brancoi. In 1991 L. Kordos and R.L. Bernor initiated a project to undertake new excavations and a detailed systematic study of the vertebrate fauna. This 37 author contribution represents a compendium initial report on these studies. A detailed edited volume will follow this publication. We find that there are 112 vertebrate taxa recorded from Rudabánya, 69 of which are fossil mammals. The Rudabánya fauna outcrops at no less than seven different localities, all believed to be essentially synchronous in age. There are no direct radioisotopic dates from Rudabánya, the lower age is constrained by a single crystal argon date of 11.4 m.y.
    [Show full text]