DOCSLIB.ORG

Homologies of the Anterior Teeth in Lndriidae and a Functional Basis for Dental Reduction in Primates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Homologies of the Anterior Teeth in Lndriidae and a Functional Basis for Dental Reduction in Primates Homologies of the Anterior Teeth in lndriidae and a Functional Basis for Dental Reduction in Primates PHILIP D. GINGERICH Museum of Paleontology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 KEY WORDS Dental reduction a Lemuriform primates . Indriidae . Dental homologies - Dental scraper . Deciduous dentition - Avahi ABSTRACT In a recent paper Schwartz ('74) proposes revised homologies of the deciduous and permanent teeth in living lemuriform primates of the family Indriidae. However, new evidence provided by the deciduous dentition of Avahi suggests that the traditional interpretations are correct, specifically: (1) the lat- eral teeth in the dental scraper of Indriidae are homologous with the incisors of Lemuridae and Lorisidae, not the canines; (2) the dental formula for the lower deciduous teeth of indriids is 2.1.3; (3) the dental formula for the lower perma- nent teeth of indriids is 2.0.2.3;and (4)decrease in number of incisors during pri- mate evolution was usually in the sequence 13, then 12, then 11. It appears that dental reduction during primate evolution occurred at the ends of integrated in- cisor and cheek tooth units to minimize disruption of their functional integrity. Anterior dental reduction in the primate Schwartz ('74) recently reviewed the prob- family Indriidae illustrates a more general lem of tooth homologies in the dental scraper problem of direction of tooth loss in primate of Indriidae and concluded that no real evi- evolution. All living lemuroid and lorisoid pri- dence has ever been presented to support the mates (except the highly specialized Dauben- interpretation that indriids possess four lower tonid share a distinctive procumbent, comb- incisors and no canines. He then gave several like configuration of the anterior lower denti- reasons in support of the contrary interpreta- tion - the dental scraper or "toothcomb" tion that two incisors and two canines make used in ingesting resin, prying bark, and in up the indriid scraper. grooming. This dental scraper is composed of In the course of a study of dental variation six teeth in Lemuridae and Lorisidae, gen- in Indriidae, a specimen ofAvahi retaining de- erally considered to be four incisors bordered ciduous teeth was found that supports the tra- by two canines (Swindler, '76). The dental ditional interpretation of homologies of the scraper of Indriidae consists of only four permanent and deciduous dentition of In- teeth. It is agreed that these teeth are homol- driidae. This new evidence is presented to help ogous with four of the six teeth in the scraper clarify anterior dental reduction in Indriidae. of lemurids and lorisids, but the question re- The whole problem is especially important as mains whether the two teeth lost in going it has a direct bearing on our understanding from the generalized lemurid condition to the of the general problem of dental reduction in more specialized indriid condition were in- primate evolution. cisors or canines. The four teeth remaining in the dental scraper of Indriidae are usually MATERIALS AND RESULTS considered to be incisors (i.e., the canines Dried skulls of adult animals of virtually all were lost; see Vallois, '55; Le Gros Clark, '71; genera of Lemuridae, Lorisidae, and Indriidae Martin, '72; among others), but they have were examined in the collections of the Cleve- also been interpreted as an incisor pair bor- land Museum of Natural History, the British dered by left and right lower canine teeth (i.e., Museum (Natural History) in London, the an incisor pair was lost: e.g., Gregory, '20: Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie in p. 214). Leiden, and the Laboratoire d'Anatomie Com- AM. J. PHYS. ANTHROP., 47: 387-394. 387 388 PHILIP D. GINGERICH paree in Paris. In addition, I studied the de- certainly a deciduous canine. The lower de- ciduous dentition in various stages of replace- ciduous formula of the Indriidae is thus prob- ment in many of these genera. The deciduous ably 2.1.3 as it is in Lemuridae and Lorisidae, dentitions of representative Indriidae and which also matches the upper deciduous for- Lemuridae are illustrated in plate 1. mula in these three families. Lemuridae, Lorisidae, and Indriidae have As shown in figures 3 and 4, the incisors and the same number of deciduous teeth (six) in canines of the deciduous dental scraper in each mandible. These teeth in Lorisidae and Lemuridae are all replaced by incisors and ca- Lemuridae (figs. 3, 4) have basically the same nines of the permanent scraper, whereas in morphology, and the deciduous formula is Propithecus, Zndri, and Avahi (fig. 21, the de- agreed to be 2.1.3, with the first three teeth ciduous canine “A’ is not replaced by a per- forming a deciduous dental scraper. In the manent tooth. Thus it appears that the per- Indriidae, both lndri and Propithecus (fig. 1) manent lower dental formula of Indriidae is have a rather different configuration, with properly interpreted as 2.0.2.3,which matches only two procumbent anterior teeth in each the permanent upper formula of 2.1.2.3except mandible contributing to the deciduous den- for loss of the canine. tal scraper. In Zndri and Propithecus these are followed by a small tooth, a relatively large DISCUSSION OF HOMOLOGIES IN INDRIIDAE tooth, a small tooth, and another relatively large tooth. By comparison with Lemuridae, Schwartz (’74) based his conclusion that the the deciduous dental formula of Indriidae is lower deciduous dental formula of Indriidae is usually given as 2.1.3 in spite of the morpho- 1.1.4 and the lower permanent formula 1.1.2.3 logical differences of the teeth from those in on three lines of evidence: (1) the morphology Lemuridae. However, Schwartz (‘74) has re- of the lateral tooth in the indriid dental cently interpreted this deciduous formula as scraper (both deciduous and permanent) is 1.1.4 (as did Gregory, ’20). most similar to that of the canine in lemurids The smallest indriid species, Avahi lanker, and lorisids; (2) tooth “A” in indriids some- significantly has an anterior deciduous denti- times occludes behind the upper canine and tion more similar to that of Lemuridae than to thus by definition tooth “A” must be a de- Zndri and Propithecus (fig. 2). Of particular ciduous premolar and not a canine; and (3) importance is the third tooth in the deciduous ontogenetic studies on the mammalian denti- series, a tooth Schwartz (‘74) called tooth “A.” tion have shown that incisor teeth develop Tooth “A” in Zndri and Propithecus (fig. 1) is a from the dental lamina in an anteroposterior very small tooth usually separated from the direction. Each of these lines of evidence is dental scraper by a small diastema. However, discussed in turn. in Avahi this tooth “A” has an elongated, pro- Dental morphology is correlated with tooth cumbent crown that forms a functional unit function, and morphological similarity is not with the other teeth of the deciduous dental always a reliable indicator of homology. The scraper. The crown of tooth “A” in Avahi is left and right lateral teeth in the indriid den- relatively much larger than tooth “A” in Indri tal scraper are most similar morphologically and Propithecus. It does not show the wear to the canines in the lemurid or lorisid dental found in Schwartz’s Age Group I1 Indriidae scraper. The main feature that makes them and its position cannot be attributed to mesial similar is a raised crest running along the lat- drift associated with wear. Because of its sim- eral margin from the tip to the base of the ilarity in position and morphology to the crown. However, a very similar raised lateral lower deciduous canine of Lemuridae, tooth crest (a “margocristid”: Gingerich, ’76) is also “A’ in Avahi is almost certainly a deciduous present on the enlarged procumbent central canine as well. Since the remaining teeth in incisors of early Tertiary plesiadapid, mi- the deciduous dentition of Avahi are very sim- crosyopid, and omomyid primates. Further- ilar to those of Propithecus and Zndri, it is dif- more, a 6-tooth dental scraper or comb vir- ficult to avoid the conclusion that the reduced tually identical to that of a lemur, including tooth “A” in the latter two genera is homol- the raised margocristids on the lateral teeth, ogous with tooth “A” in Avahi. Thus, in spite is known in the early Eocene condylarth of the reduced size of tooth “A’ in Zndri and Thryptacodon (Princeton University no. Propithecus compared to the deciduous canine 208531, which also retains large projecting ca- of Lemuridae, tooth “A” in Indriidae is almost nine teeth - the lemur-like lateral teeth of DENTAL REDUCTION IN PRIMATES 389 the scraper are thus incisors and not canines Schwartz cites on dental development in as in Lemur. The presence of raised margo- mammals, Osborn (’73: p. 554) states that in- cristids on the lateral teeth in the dental cisor, canine, and molar determinants are scraper of indriids is probably closely corre- usually present in the earliest embryos in lated with tooth position and dental function which tooth formation is evident. In other and not a reliable indicator of their homology words, the canine determinant is present with the lower canines of lemurids. whether the incisor developmental sequence The fact that tooth “A” sometimes occludes approaches it or not. Thus it is unlikely that behind the deciduous upper canine (in very Schwartz is correct in assuming that inhib- young individuals of Schwartz’s Age Group I) ition of the posterior incisor series would ef- does not necessarily define its homology, as fect an inhibition of the canine. Following Schwartz (‘74: p. 112) suggests. The conven- Osborn (‘731, the fact that deciduous incisors tional identifications of teeth widely used in develop from front to back would make it ap- mammalogy refer primarily to tooth positions pear that the easiest way to reduce the num- and occlusal relationships in primitive and ber of incisors in a dental series would be to generalized mammals - to prove that a given suppress those that develop last, i.e., reduce tooth in a specialized mammal is homologous the sequence by losing I3 first, then 12,and fin- with the canine tooth in a generalized mam- ally I,.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Avahi Laniger)
    A. Zaramody et al.: Phylogeny of Eastern Woolly Lemurs MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY AND TAXONOMIC REVISION OF THE EASTERN WOOLLY LEMURS (AVAHI LANIGER) Zaramody A, Fausser J-L, Roos C, Zinner D, Andriaholinirina N, Rabarivola C, Norscia I, Tattersall I and Rumpler Y Key words: Avahi, Strepsirrhini, taxonomy, mtDNA, cytogenetics, new species Abstract The western and northern populations of woolly lemurs (Avahi) have been di- vided into three distinct species (A. cleesei, A. occidentalis and A. unicolor), whereas the eastern populations are still considered to represent a single species (A. laniger), despite the wider distribution of woolly lemurs in this region. To analyze the diver- sity within the eastern population and among the eastern and western populations, we compared cytogenetic data and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequences from woolly lemurs from 14 sites in the east of Madagascar and from three sites in the west, representing three of the four recognized species. Cytogenetic and mtDNA data are in agreement and confirm the distinctiveness of A. laniger and A. occiden- talis. Within A. laniger the molecular data revealed large genetic distances among local populations. On the basis of these new data we propose to split A. laniger into three species: (1) north of the Mongoro/Onive Rivers, (2) south of the Mongoro/Onive Rivers at least as far south as Mahasoarivo, and (3) from the south-east (Manombo, Sainte Luce). Within the south-eastern species (3) two clearly separated subspecies can be distinguished, one from the region of Manombo and the other from the region of Sainte Luce. The northern species (1) shows considerable intraspecies genetic dis- tances and may consist of several populations distinguishable as subspecies.
    [Show full text]
  • Oral Structure, Dental Anatomy, Eruption, Periodontium and Oral
    Oral Structures and Types of teeth By: Ms. Zain Malkawi, MSDH Introduction • Oral structures are essential in reflecting local and systemic health • Oral anatomy: a fundamental of dental sciences on which the oral health care provider is based. • Oral anatomy used to assess the relationship of teeth, both within and between the arches The color and morphology of the structures may vary with genetic patterns and age. One Quadrant at the Dental Arches Parts of a Tooth • Crown • Root Parts of a Tooth • Crown: part of the tooth covered by enamel, portion of the tooth visible in the oral cavity. • Root: part of the tooth which covered by cementum. • Posterior teeth • Anterior teeth Root • Apex: rounded end of the root • Periapex (periapical): area around the apex of a tooth • Foramen: opening at the apex through which blood vessels and nerves enters • Furcation: area of a two or three rooted tooth where the root divides Tooth Layers • Enamel: the hardest calcified tissue covering the dentine in the crown of the tooth (96%) mineralized. • Dentine: hard calcified tissue surrounding the pulp and underlying the enamel and cementum. Makes up the bulk of the tooth, (70%) mineralized. Tooth Layers • Pulp: the innermost noncalsified tissues containing blood vessels, lymphatics and nerves • Cementum: bone like calcified tissue covering the dentin in the root of the tooth, 50% mineralized. Tooth Layers Tooth Surfaces • Facial: Labial , Buccal • Lingual: called palatal for upper arch. • Proximal: mesial , distal • Contact area: area where that touches the adjacent tooth in the same arch. Tooth Surfaces • Incisal: surface of an incisor which toward the opposite arch, the biting surface, the newly erupted “permanent incisors have mamelons”: projections of enamel on this surface.
    [Show full text]
  • Veterinary Dentistry Basics
    Veterinary Dentistry Basics Introduction This program will guide you, step by step, through the most important features of veterinary dentistry in current best practice. This chapter covers the basics of veterinary dentistry and should enable you to: ü Describe the anatomical components of a tooth and relate it to location and function ü Know the main landmarks important in assessment of dental disease ü Understand tooth numbering and formulae in different species. ã 2002 eMedia Unit RVC 1 of 10 Dental Anatomy Crown The crown is normally covered by enamel and meets the root at an important landmark called the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). The CEJ is anatomically the neck of the tooth and is not normally visible. Root Teeth may have one or more roots. In those teeth with two or more roots the point where they diverge is called the furcation angle. This can be a bifurcation or a trifurcation. At the end of the root is the apex, which can have a single foramen (humans), a multiple canal delta arrangement (cats and dogs) or remain open as in herbivores. In some herbivores the apex closes eventually (horse) whereas whereas in others it remains open throughout life. The apical area is where nerves, blood vessels and lymphatics travel into the pulp. Alveolar Bone The roots are encased in the alveolar processes of the jaws. The process comprises alveolar bone, trabecular bone and compact bone. The densest bone lines the alveolus and is called the cribriform plate. It may be seen radiographically as a white line called the lamina dura.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development of the Permanent Teeth(
    ro o 1Ppr4( SVsT' r&cr( -too c The Development of the Permanent Teeth( CARMEN M. NOLLA, B.S., D.D.S., M.S.* T. is important to every dentist treat- in the mouth of different children, the I ing children to have a good under - majority of the children exhibit some standing of the development of the den- pattern in the sequence of eruption tition. In order to widen one's think- (Klein and Cody) 9 (Lo and Moyers). 1-3 ing about the impingement of develop- However, a consideration of eruption ment on dental problems and perhaps alone makes one cognizant of only one improve one's clinical judgment, a com- phase of the development of the denti- prehensive study of the development of tion. A measure of calcification (matura- the teeth should be most helpful. tion) at different age-levels will provide In the study of child growth and de- a more precise index for determining velopment, it has been pointed out by dental age and will contribute to the various investigators that the develop- concept of the organism as a whole. ment of the dentition has a close cor- In 1939, Pinney2' completed a study relation to some other measures of of the development of the mandibular growth. In the Laboratory School of the teeth, in which he utilized a technic for University of Michigan, the nature of a serial study of radiographs of the same growth and development has been in- individual. It became apparent that a vestigated by serial examination of the similar study should be conducted in same children at yearly intervals, utiliz- order to obtain information about all of ing a set of objective measurements the teeth.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological Integration in the Hominin Dentition: Evolutionary, Developmental, and Functional Factors
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01508.x MORPHOLOGICAL INTEGRATION IN THE HOMININ DENTITION: EVOLUTIONARY, DEVELOPMENTAL, AND FUNCTIONAL FACTORS Aida Gomez-Robles´ 1,2 and P. David Polly3 1Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research, Adolf Lorenz Gasse 2, A-3422 Altenberg, Austria 2E-mails: [email protected]; [email protected] 3Department of Geological Sciences, Indiana University, 1001 East 10th Street, Bloomington, Indiana 47405 Received June 29, 2011 Accepted October 19, 2011 As the most common and best preserved remains in the fossil record, teeth are central to our understanding of evolution. However, many evolutionary analyses based on dental traits overlook the constraints that limit dental evolution. These constraints are di- verse, ranging from developmental interactions between the individual elements of a homologous series (the whole dentition) to functional constraints related to occlusion. This study evaluates morphological integration in the hominin dentition and its effect on dental evolution in an extensive sample of Plio- and Pleistocene hominin teeth using geometric morphometrics and phyloge- netic comparative methods. Results reveal that premolars and molars display significant levels of covariation; that integration is stronger in the mandibular dentition than in the maxillary dentition; and that antagonist teeth, especially first molars, are strongly integrated. Results also show an association of morphological integration and evolution. Stasis is observed in elements with strong functional and/or developmental interactions, namely in first molars. Alternatively, directional evolution (and weaker integration) occurs in the elements with marginal roles in occlusion and mastication, probably in response to other direct or indirect selective pressures.
    [Show full text]
  • Allometric Scaling in the Dentition of Primates and Prediction of Body Weight from Tooth Size in Fossils
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 58%-100 (1982) Allometric Scaling in the Dentition of Primates and Prediction of Body Weight From Tooth Size in Fossils PHILIP D. GINGERICH, B. HOLLY SMITH, AND KAREN ROSENBERG Museum of Paleontology (P.D.G.)and Department of Anthropology (B.H.S. and K.R.), The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 KEY WORDS Primate dentition, Allometry, Body size, Adapidae, Hominoidea ABSTRACT Tooth size varies exponentially with body weight in primates. Logarithmic transformation of tooth crown area and body weight yields a linear model of slope 0.67 as an isometric (geometric) baseline for study of dental allometry. This model is compared with that predicted by metabolic scaling (slope = 0.75). Tarsius and other insectivores have larger teeth for their body size than generalized primates do, and they are not included in this analysis. Among generalized primates, tooth size is highly correlated with body size. Correlations of upper and lower cheek teeth with body size range from 0.90-0.97, depending on tooth position. Central cheek teeth (P: and M:) have allometric coefficients ranging from 0.57-0.65, falling well below geometric scaling. Anterior and posterior cheek teeth scale at or above metabolic scaling. Considered individually or as a group, upper cheek teeth scale allometrically with lower coefficients than corresponding lower cheek teeth; the reverse is true for incisors. The sum of crown areas for all upper cheek teeth scales significantly below geometric scaling, while the sum of crown areas for all lower cheek teeth approximates geometric scaling. Tooth size can be used to predict the body weight of generalized fossil primates.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of Human Dentition … with Dental and Orthodontic Considerations
    Development of Human Dentition … with dental and orthodontic considerations Prenatal Infancy Early Childhood Childhood Late Childhood Adolescence & Adulthood (First twelve permanent teeth erupt) (Next twelve permanent teeth erupt) (Four twelve year molars erupt) 4 months Birth 18-30 6-7 9-10 12-15 in utero months years years years 6 months 4-8 2-3 7-8 10-11 21 in utero months years years years years 1. Anomalies in primary tooth 8-12 3-4 8-9 11-12 1. Trauma to the permanent dentition may cause A. Number C. Proportion months years years complications such as: B. Size D. Shape years A. Ankylosis C. Altered occlusion 2. Amelogenesis Impfecta of primary dentition B. Necrosis D. Reinforce sports mouthguard 3. Enamel Hypoplasia 2. Piercings 4. Cleft palate/lip development A. Source of infections B. Tooth fractures 5. Tetracycline Staining of primary teeth 3. TIME FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PHASE 2, AND LIMITED ORTHODONTICS 4. INVISALIGN 1. Untreated decay of primary dentition may cause 1. After age 8yrs, tetracycline antibiotics is not 9-15 4-5 5. Third Molars (Wisdom Teeth) typically evaluated months years complications to the permanent dentition contraindicated A. Enamel hypoplasia B. Space loss 2. Trauma to the permanent dentition may cause 2. TIME FOR INTERCEPTIVE AND PHASE 1 complications such as: ORTHODONTICS A. Ankylosis C. Altered occlusion B. Necrosis D. Reinforce sports mouthguard 3. IN BETWEEN PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 ORTHODONTICS 4. TIME FOR COMPREHENSIVE ORTHODONTICS 15-21 5-6 months years “Get A Great Smile For Life.” DANIEL J. GROB, D.D.S., M.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ORTHODONTIC DIALOGUE Orthodontic Dialogue, Summer 1997 Issue, Dr
    ORTHODONTIC DIALOGUE Orthodontic Dialogue, Summer 1997 Issue, Dr. Gerald Nelson, Berkeley, CA Orthodontic treatment in the The palatal midline suture closes back, increasing the lower facial mixed dentition at about the age of 13 in girls, height, measured from nose to chin. “I’d like my daughter’s braces 16 in boys. This response is appropriate for the done now so we don’t have to deal The fronto-palatal suture closes at patient who has an average or short with it at age 13.” Orthodontists, around age 2. lower face height, but not appropri- pediatric dentists, and general den- The mandible is a single bone (no ate for the patient with a long lower tists have all heard this before. sutures) after the age of one. face height. Orthodontic clinicians know, how- Growth rates peak for girls at age The retrusive maxilla can be ever, that most patients who receive 13, boys age 15. brought forward if appropriate orthodontic care in the mixed denti- forces are applied to the maxillary tion will need a second phase of dentition. An example of this is the treatment in the permanent denti- use of a fixed expansion device on tion. Whether to render treatment the upper buccal segments, with in the mixed dentition requires hooks to accept elastics from a for- careful case selection and a thorough ward-pull headgear. We know such diagnosis and treatment plan. appliances will slip the maxilla for- The mixed dentition is the ward on its sutures. This is best developmental period after the per- done at an early age, as more sutures manent first molars and incisors are open.9 have erupted, and before the The narrow maxilla is often remaining deciduous teeth are lost.
    [Show full text]
  • Order Suborder Infraorder Superfamily Family
    ORDER SUBORDER INFRAORDER SUPERFAMILY FAMILY SUBFAMILY TRIBE GENUS SUBGENUS SPECIES Monotremata Tachyglossidae Tachyglossus aculeatus Monotremata Tachyglossidae Zaglossus attenboroughi Monotremata Tachyglossidae Zaglossus bartoni Monotremata Tachyglossidae Zaglossus bruijni Monotremata Ornithorhynchidae Ornithorhynchus anatinus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Caluromyinae Caluromys Caluromys philander Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Caluromyinae Caluromys Mallodelphys derbianus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Caluromyinae Caluromys Mallodelphys lanatus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Caluromyinae Caluromysiops irrupta Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Caluromyinae Glironia venusta Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Chironectes minimus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis aurita Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis imperfecta Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis marsupialis Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis pernigra Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis virginiana Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Didelphis albiventris Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus formosus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus emiliae Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus microtarsus Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus marica Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus dryas Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus aceramarcae Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae Gracilinanus agricolai Didelphimorphia Didelphidae Didelphinae
    [Show full text]
  • Duke University Dissertation Template
    Lemur Teeth in Three Keys: Dietary Adaptation, Ecospace Occupation, and Macroevolutionary Dynamics by Ethan L. Fulwood Department of Evolutionary Anthropology Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Doug Boyer, Supervisor ___________________________ Richard Kay, Chair ___________________________ Daniel McShea ___________________________ Blythe Williams ___________________________ Elizabeth St. Clair Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Evolutionary Anthropology in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 ABSTRACT iv Lemur Teeth in Three Keys: Dietary Adaptation, Ecospace Occupation, and Macroevolutionary Dynamics by Ethan Fulwood Department of Evolutionary Anthropology Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Doug Boyer, Supervisor ___________________________ Richard Kay, Chair ___________________________ Daniel McShea ___________________________ Blythe Williams ___________________________ Elizabeth St. Clair An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Evolutionary Anthropology in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 Copyright by Ethan Fulwood 2019 Abstract Dietary adaptation appears to have driven many aspects of the high-level diversification of primates. Dental topography metrics provide a means of quantifying morphological correlates of dietary adaptation
    [Show full text]
  • A Major Shift in Diversification Rate Helps Explain Macroevolutionary
    ORIGINAL ARTICLE doi:10.1111/evo.13237 A major shift in diversification rate helps explain macroevolutionary patterns in primate species diversity Jessica H. Arbour1,2 and Sharlene E. Santana1,3 1Department of Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 2E-mail: [email protected] 3Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 Received July 8, 2016 Accepted March 12, 2017 Primates represent one of the most species rich, wide ranging, and ecologically diverse clades of mammals. What major macroevo- lutionary factors have driven their diversification and contributed to the modern distribution of primate species remains widely debated. We employed phylogenetic comparative methods to examine the role of clade age and evolutionary rate heterogeneity in the modern distribution of species diversity of Primates. Primate diversification has accelerated since its origin, with decreased extinction leading to a shift to even higher evolutionary rates in the most species rich family (Cercopithecidae). Older primate clades tended to be more diverse, however a shift in evolutionary rate was necessary to adequately explain the imbalance in species diversity. Species richness was also poorly explained by geographic distribution, especially once clade age and evolutionary rate shifts were accounted for, and may relate instead to other ecological factors. The global distribution of primate species diversity appears to have been strongly impacted by heterogeneity in evolutionary rates. KEY WORDS: BAMM, cercopithecidae, lineage diversification, mammals, phylogenetic imbalance, phylogenetic comparative methods. Primates is one of the largest (>400 species), most ecologically 2012). Other comparative analyses have linked changes in pri- diverse, socially complex, and broadly distributed orders of mam- mate lineage diversification to biogeographic or ecological fac- mals (Lefebvre et al.
    [Show full text]
  • 14 Primate Introduction
    Introduction to Primates For crying out loud, Phil….Can’t you just beat your chest like everyone else? Objectives • What are the approaches to studying primates? • Why is primate conservation important? • Know (memorize) the classification of primates • Locate the geographical distribution of primates • Present an overview of the strepsirhines • What is the haplorhine condition? • What makes tarsiers unique? • How are prosimians, monkeys, apes and humans classified? 1 Approaches to Studying Evolu6on Paleontological: Fossil Record Comparave approach 2 Comparisons " ! Modern human hunters-gatherers e.g., Australian Aborigines, Ainu, Bushmen " ! Social Carnivores (wild dogs, lions, hyenas, ?gers, wolves) " ! Non-human primates 3 1 Primate Studies " ! Non-human primates " ! Reasoning by homology " ! Reasoning by analogy " ! Primatology - study of living as well as deceased primates " ! Distribuon of primates 4 Primate Conservaon The silky sifaka (Propithecus candidus), found only in Madagascar, has been on The World's 25 Most Endangered Primates list since its inception in 2000. Between 100 and 1,000 individuals are left in the wild. 5 Order Primates (approx. 200 species) (1) Tree-shrew; (2) Lemur; (3) Tarsier; (4) Cercopithecoid monKey; (5) Chimpanzee; (6) Australian Aboriginal 6 2 Geographic Distribu?on 7 n ! Nocturnal Terms n ! Diurnal n ! Crepuscular n ! Arboreal n ! Terrestrial n ! Insectivorous n ! Frugivorous 8 Primate Classification(s) 9 3 Classificaon of Primates " ! Two suborders: " ! Prosimii-prosimians (“pre-apes”) " ! Anthropoidea (humanlike) 10 Strepsirhine/Haplorhine 11 Traditional & Alternative Classifications Traditional Alternative 12 4 Tree Shrews Order Scandentia not a primate 13 Prosimians lemurs tarsiers lorises 14 Prosimians XXXXXXXXX 15 5 Lemurs 3 Families " ! 1. Lemuridae (true lemurs) Sifaka (Family " ! 2.
    [Show full text]