DOCSLIB.ORG

2008 Faunal Analysis of James Fort

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2008 Faunal Analysis of James Fort Faunal Analysis of James Fort: Structure 166, Pit 5, Pit 8, Pit 9, Pit 10, and Pit 11 James City County, Virginia Report submitted to: William M. Kelso Bly Straube Jamestown Rediscovery Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities Submitted by: Susan Trevarthen Andrews November 2008 Table of Contents List of Appendices ............................................................................................. iii List of Tables ..................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 Recovery Methods .............................................................................................. 2 Laboratory Techniques ....................................................................................... 3 Analytic Techniques ........................................................................................... 3 Relative Dietary Estimate ............................................................................ 3 Number of Identified Specimens ................................................................. 4 Minimum Number of Individuals ................................................................ 4 Useable Meat Weight ................................................................................... 5 Biomass ........................................................................................................ 5 Taphonomy .................................................................................................. 5 Taxa Identified ................................................................................................. 11 Crustaceans ................................................................................................ 11 Fish............................................................................................................. 11 Reptiles/Amphibians .................................................................................. 20 Birds ........................................................................................................... 23 Wild Mammals .......................................................................................... 29 Commensals ............................................................................................... 34 Domestic Mammals ................................................................................... 35 Fishing and Hunting ......................................................................................... 38 Taphonomic Influences .................................................................................... 30 Structure 166 .............................................................................................. 41 Pit 5 ............................................................................................................ 42 Pit 8 ............................................................................................................ 42 Pit 9 ............................................................................................................ 42 Pit 10 .......................................................................................................... 44 Pit 11 .......................................................................................................... 44 Relative Dietary Importance............................................................................. 44 Structure 166 .............................................................................................. 44 Pit 5 ............................................................................................................ 45 Pit 8 ............................................................................................................ 46 Pit 9 ............................................................................................................ 47 Pit 10 .......................................................................................................... 47 Pit 11 .......................................................................................................... 48 Kill-Off Patterns ............................................................................................... 48 Pig Kill-Off ................................................................................................ 50 Element Distributions and Cuts of Meat .......................................................... 52 Cattle Element Distribution ....................................................................... 53 Pig Element Distribution............................................................................ 53 Butchering and Cuts of Meat ............................................................................ 54 Concluding Remarks ........................................................................................ 57 References ........................................................................................................ 67 ii Appendices Appendix A. Summaries Charts ................................................................ 75 Appendix B. Age Distribution Data, Individual Features .......................... 89 Appendix C. Age Distribution Data, Combined Features ......................... 96 Appendix D. Element Distributions, Individual Features .......................... 99 Appendix E. Bone Measurements ............................................................ 102 Appendix F List of Bones By Context. ................................................... 105 List of Tables 1. Assemblages Analyzed ................................................................................ 2 2. Taxa Identified ............................................................................................. 7 3. Taphonomic Influences .............................................................................. 43 4. Relative Dietary Importance, Based on Biomass ....................................... 45 5. Kill-Off Distribution Data, Pig .................................................................. 51 6. Element Distributions, Combined Features ............................................... 54 7. Relative Dietary Importance, Wild vs. Domestic, Biomass ....................... 58 8. Biomass Percentages for Individual Species .............................................. 60 9. Element Distribution for Cattle and Pig, Combined Features .................... 65 10. Summary Chart, Structure 166 ................................................................. 76 11. Summary Chart, Pit 5 ................................................................................ 77 12. Summary Chart, Pit 8 ................................................................................ 81 13. Summary Chart, Pit 9 ................................................................................ 84 14. Summary Chart, Pit 10 .............................................................................. 86 15. Summary Chart, Pit 11 .............................................................................. 87 16. Age Distribution, Cattle, Structure 166 ..................................................... 90 17. Age Distribution, Pig, Pit 5 ....................................................................... 91 18. Age Distribution, Pig, Pit 8 ....................................................................... 92 19. Age Distribution, Cattle, Pit 8 ................................................................... 93 20. Age Distribution,, Pig, Pit 9 ...................................................................... 94 21. Age Distribution,, Cattle, Pit 9 .................................................................. 95 22. Age Distribution, Pig, Combined Features ................................................ 97 23. Age Distribution, Cattle, Combined Features ........................................... 98 24. Element Distributions, Structure 166 ...................................................... 100 25. Element Distributions, Pit 5 .................................................................... 100 26. Element Distributions, Pit 8 .................................................................... 100 27. Element Distributions, Pit 9 .................................................................... 101 28. Element Distributions, Pit 10 .................................................................. 101 29. Element Distributions, Pit 11 .................................................................. 101 30. Bone Measurements ................................................................................ 104 31. List of Bones By Context ........................................................................ 106 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to thank Bill Kelso, Bly Straube, and the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities for giving us the exciting opportunity to study faunal remains from Jamestown. The diverse species represented in the assemblages and complexity of the analysis meant that the faunal identification and final report could not have been completed without the expertise and kind help of a number of individuals. From Colonial Williamsburg’s Zooarchaeology Laboratory I would like to thank Steve Atkins for assisting in the identification of the fish,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2. Bilateral Cleft Anatomy 19
    BILATERAL CLEFT ANATOMY IS ATTACHED TO THE SINGLE CLEFT THE PREMAXILLA NORMALLY ROTATED OUTWARD MAXILLA ON ONE SIDE AND THIS ENTIRE COMPONENT IS THE CLEFT SIDE MAXILLA IN AN VARYING DEGREES FROM ASYMMETRICAL DIFFERENT DISTORTION DOUBLE CLEFTS PRESENT AN ENTIRELY CONFIGURA TION IN THE COMPLETE BILATERAL CLEFT THE PREMAXILLA IS UNATTACHED THREE WHICH TO EITHER MAXILLA THUS THERE ARE SEPARATE COMPONENTS IN THEIR DISTORTION THE MAXILLAE ARE MORE OR LESS SYMMETRICAL TWO WHILE THE ARE USUALLY EQUAL TO EACH OTHER IN SIZE AND POSITION FORWARD ITS IN CENTRAL PREMAXILLARY ELEMENT PROCEEDS ON OWN WITHIN ITSELF FOR DIFFERENT DEGREES BUT WITH SYMMETRY EXCEPT IJI POSSIBLE DEVIATION FRONTONASAL THE COMPLETE SEPARATION OF THE CENTRAL COMPONENT OF PROLABIUM AND PREMAXILLA FROM THE LATERAL MAXILLARY SEGMENTS THE VASCULAR ABNORMALLY INFLUENCES NOSE PHILTRUM MUSCULATURE AND OF ALL THREE ELEMENTS ITY NERVE SUPPLY GROWTH DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE CLEFT IS INCOMPLETE ON BOTH SIDES THE DEFORMITY IS LESS AND IS STILL SYMMETRICAL IN SUCH CASE THERE IS USUALLY MORE OR LESS INTACT ALVEOLUS AND LITTLE OR NO PROTRUSION OF THE PRE THE MAXILLA THE COLUMELLA IS LIKELY TO BE LONGER THAN IN COMPLETE CLEFT BUT NOT OF NORMAL LENGTH SOMETIMES SOMETIMES THE DEGREE OF CLEFT VARIES ON EACH SIDE SIDE THE INCOMPLETENESS SHOWS AS ONLY THE SLIGHTEST NOTCH ON ONE SIDE OR THERE CLEFT ON THE OPPOSITE AND HALFWAY OR THREEQUARTER ON THE CLEFT ONE SIDE AND AN INCOMPLETE ONE CAN BE COMPLETE ON OF THE EXASPERATING ASPECT OTHER WHICH CONDITION EXAGGERATES THE ROTATION OF THE IN THE AND NOSE
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals from the Mesozoic of Mongolia
    Mammals from the Mesozoic of Mongolia Introduction and Simpson (1926) dcscrihed these as placental (eutherian) insectivores. 'l'he deltathcroids originally Mongolia produces one of the world's most extraordi- included with the insectivores, more recently have narily preserved assemblages of hlesozoic ma~nmals. t)een assigned to the Metatheria (Kielan-Jaworowska Unlike fossils at most Mesozoic sites, Inany of these and Nesov, 1990). For ahout 40 years these were the remains are skulls, and in some cases these are asso- only Mesozoic ~nanimalsknown from Mongolia. ciated with postcranial skeletons. Ry contrast, 'I'he next discoveries in Mongolia were made by the Mesozoic mammals at well-known sites in North Polish-Mongolian Palaeontological Expeditions America and other continents have produced less (1963-1971) initially led by Naydin Dovchin, then by complete material, usually incomplete jaws with den- Rinchen Barsbold on the Mongolian side, and Zofia titions, or isolated teeth. In addition to the rich Kielan-Jaworowska on the Polish side, Kazi~nierz samples of skulls and skeletons representing Late Koualski led the expedition in 1964. Late Cretaceous Cretaceous mam~nals,certain localities in Mongolia ma~nmalswere collected in three Gohi Desert regions: are also known for less well preserved, but important, Bayan Zag (Djadokhta Formation), Nenlegt and remains of Early Cretaceous mammals. The mammals Khulsan in the Nemegt Valley (Baruungoyot from hoth Early and Late Cretaceous intervals have Formation), and llcrmiin 'ISav, south-\vest of the increased our understanding of diversification and Neniegt Valley, in the Red beds of Hermiin 'rsav, morphologic variation in archaic mammals. which have heen regarded as a stratigraphic ecluivalent Potentially this new information has hearing on the of the Baruungoyot Formation (Gradzinslti r't crl., phylogenetic relationships among major branches of 1977).
    [Show full text]
  • Fieldbook of ILLINOIS MAMMALS
    Field book of ILLINOIS MAMMALS Donald F. Hoffm*isler Carl O. Mohr 1LLINOI S NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY MANUAL 4 NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY LIBRARY Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign http://www.archive.org/details/fieldbookofillinOOhof JfL Eastern cottontail, a mammal that is common in Illinois. STATE OF ILLINOIS William G. Stratton, Governor DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND EDUCATION Vera M. Binks, Director Fieldbook of ILLINOIS MAMMALS Donald F. HofFmeister Carl O. Mohr MANUAL 4 Printed by Authority of the State of Illinois NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY DIVISION Harlow B. Mills, Chief URBANA. June. 1957 STATE OF ILLINOIS William G. Stratton, Governor DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND EDUCATION Vera M. Binks, Director BOARD OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION Vera M. Binks, Chairman A. E. Emerson, Ph.D., Biology Walter H. Newhouse, Ph.D., Geology L. H. Tiffany, Ph.D., Forestry Roger Adams, Ph.D., D.Sc, Chemistry Robert H. Anderson, B.S.C.E., Engineering W. L. Everitt, E.E., Ph.D., representing the President of the University of Illinois Delyte W. Morris, Ph.D., President of Southern Illinois University NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY DIVISION Urbana, Illinois HARLOW B. MILLS, Ph.D., Chief Bessie B. East, M.S., Assistant to the Chief This paper is a ct>ntribution from the Sectittn of Faunistic Surveys and Insect Identification and from the Section of Wildlife Research. ( 1 1655—5M—9-56) FOREWORD IN 1936 the first number of the Manual series of the Natural His- tory Survey Division appeared. It was titled the Firldbook of Illinois Wild Flowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Premaxilla
    12G OF THE CLEFT WHICH INFLUENCES MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT DEFORMITY THE DENTAL OCCLUSION AND MAXILLARY PLATFORM FOR THE FACE IS THE OF CLEFT OF THE ALVEOLUS EXTENDING THE HARD PRESENCE THROUGH CLEFT DOES THE THERE PALATE IF THE NOT GO THROUGH ALVEOLUS IS ANTERIOR ARCH MAINTAIN USUALLY ENOUGH BUTTRESS IN THE BONY TO OCCLUSION WITH THE MANDIBLE AND RESIST DISTORTIONS CAUSED DIRECTLY BY THE SURGER OR SECONDARILY BY POSTSURGICAL CONTRACTURE THE DISCREPANCIES IN THE MAXILLAR AND PREMAXILLARY SEGMENTS OF DISTORTION IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH CLEFTING PRESENT VARYING DEGREES THE NATURE OF SURGEON TO TAKE UP THE SCALPEL OR CHISEL TO CORRECT DEFORMITY AND ALTHOUGH MANY WETE CONTENT TO USE THE COM MOLD THE PLESSION OF BANDAGES OR LIP CLOSURE TO PREMAXILLAR PROTRUSION SOME WERE STIMULATED TO TAKE MORE RADICAL ACTION EXCISION OF PREMAXILLA IN 1814 XAVIER BICHAT NOTED THAT DESAULT HAD REMOVED THE PROJECTING BONY PROMINENCE OF THE PREMAXILLA IN BILATERAL CLEFTS AND BY THREE MONTHS ALL HAD HEALED HE ALSO OBSERVED BUT THE NANSVERSE DIAMCTER OF THE UPPER JAW DIMINISHED BY THE WHOLE IDRH OF THE PLOJECRING BUTTON DID NOR CORRESPOND ANY MORE TO THE LOWEI OF THE JAW ND AS IS OFTEN OBSERVED IN OLD PERSONS THERE SUPERVENED SETTING UPPER IN THE LOWER JAW WHICH WAS EXTREMELY INCONVENIENT FOT MASTICATION THIS INCONVENIENCE BEING THE OBVIOUS TESULT OF LO OF SUBSTANCE IN THE SUPERIOR MAXILLARY BONE CHANGED THE PRACTICE OF DESAULT ON THIS POINT HE TURNED EXTERNAL THE TO PRESSURE AGAINST PREMAXILLA PRESURGICAL ORTHOPEDICS VV ITH LINEN CLOTH BANDAGES OSTECTOMY AND OSTEOTOMY
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Characteristics of the Premaxilla and Orthodontic Treatment Principles in Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate
    Growth Characteristics of the Premaxilla and Orthodontic Treatment Principles in Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate KARIN VARGERVIK, D.D.S. San Francisco, California Sixty-three individuals with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) were studied. In 51 of these subjects no surgical set-back or early bone grafting procedures were done. In the other 12 subjects early surgical procedures to reduce the prominence of the premaxilla had been done. In the larger group the premaxilla was, on the average, protrusive until age 12, after which it gradually became more retrusive. By the end of the growth period the premaxilla was not excessively protrusive in any of these subjects. It was concluded that it is advantageous for the premaxilla in individuals with BCLP to be protrusive during most of the growth period, since the premaxilla grows forward at a slower rate than the mandible. In the 12 subjects with premaxillary surgery, midface retrusion was demonstrated at an early age. The forward growth of the _ premaxilla in these individuals was slower than in the BCLP without premaxillary surgery and all 12 subjects developed rather severe midface retrusion. Orthodontic treatment principles for four different stages of craniofacial and dental development have been outlined. The growth pattern of the premaxilla in if the clefts are complete. Under normal bilateral clefts differs significantly from conditions, growth of the premaxilla is con- normal premaxillary growth. Excessive trolled by forward growth of the midline growth and a horizontal direction of structures and the lateral processes which growth are manifest in utero, and the pre- come forward to entirely enclose the pre- maxilla is generally protrusive at birth.
    [Show full text]
  • What to Do Or Not to Do
    WHAT TO DO OR NOT TO DO BOUT THE PROJECTING PREMAXILLA HI SHAKESPEARES PRINCE OF DENMARK HAVING LOST HIS AND DISCOVERED HEINOUS CRIED OUT IN FATHER SEEN GHOST CRIME ODE WITH WHAT MIGHT WELL BECOME PLASTIC SURGEONS TO PROJECTING PREMAXILLA THE TIME IS OUT OF JOINT CURSED SPITE THAT CVER WAS BORN TO SET IT RIGHT NAY COME LETS GO TOGETHER NO APOLOGIES ARE OFFERED FOR THE SIZE OF THIS CHAPTER WITHOUT DOUBT THE OMINOUS SHADOW CAST BY THE PROJECTING PREMAXILLA OVER ITS FLANKING MAXILLARY SEGMENTS AND THE OBLITERATION OF THIS SHADOW BY THE ULTIMATE ALIGNMENT OF THE TRIPLET IS THE NUMBER ONE PROBLEM IN CLEFT LIP AND PALATE SURGERY TODAY REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE REVEALS WHAT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN AND STILL IS FRANTIC EFFORT TO EQUALIZE GIANT AND TWO DWARFS OF THE SAME AGE WITH NYTHING AVAILABLEMALLET RUBBER BANDS CHISEL SAW SCA PLATES MECHANICAL SQUEEZERS MUSCLES GROWTH AND TIME YET IT IS ESSENTIAL TO KNOWWHAT HAS BEEN TRIED IN ORDER TO KNOWNOT ONLY WHAT TO DO AND NOT TO DO BUT WHAT IS LEFT STILL TO BE TRIED IN BILATERAL CLEFTS THE POSITION OF THE PREMAXILLA IS THE KEYSTONE TO THE RECONSTRUCTION IF IT RESTS WITHIN THE MAXILLARY ARCH CLOSURE OF THE LIP CLEFTS OFFERS NO GREAT PROBLEM THIS IS THE USUAL SITUA TION IN INCOMPLETE BILATERAL CLEFTS IN COMPLETE BILATERAL CLEFTS HOWEVER THE PREMAXILLA INVARIABLY EXTENDS IN FRONT OF THE PREMAXILLARY ELEMENTS AND THE PROJECTION CAN VARY FROM INSIG NIFICANT ALMOST TO INSURMOUNTABLE PROTRUSION OFTEN ASSOCIATED WITH DEVIATION THIS PROJECTION HAS BEEN TREATED IN NUMEROUS WAYS OVER THE CENTURIES PRIMARY EXCISION
    [Show full text]
  • VIEW Open Access Creating Diversity in Mammalian Facial Morphology: a Review of Potential Developmental Mechanisms Kaoru Usui and Masayoshi Tokita*
    Usui and Tokita EvoDevo (2018) 9:15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13227-018-0103-4 EvoDevo REVIEW Open Access Creating diversity in mammalian facial morphology: a review of potential developmental mechanisms Kaoru Usui and Masayoshi Tokita* Abstract Mammals (class Mammalia) have evolved diverse craniofacial morphology to adapt to a wide range of ecological niches. However, the genetic and developmental mechanisms underlying the diversifcation of mammalian craniofa- cial morphology remain largely unknown. In this paper, we focus on the facial length and orofacial clefts of mammals and deduce potential mechanisms that produced diversity in mammalian facial morphology. Small-scale changes in facial morphology from the common ancestor, such as slight changes in facial length and the evolution of the midline cleft in some lineages of bats, could be attributed to heterochrony in facial bone ossifcation. In contrast, large-scale changes of facial morphology from the common ancestor, such as a truncated, widened face as well as the evolution of the bilateral cleft possessed by some bat species, could be brought about by changes in growth and patterning of the facial primordium (the facial processes) at the early stages of embryogenesis. Keywords: Mammals, Craniofacial morphology, Diversity, Transgenic mice, Bats, Facial processes, Neural crest, Ectomesenchyme, Bone, Orofacial cleft Morphological diversity in mammalian faces recognized in each mammalian group (Fig. 1). Crani- Mammals (class Mammalia) are one of the major groups ofacial morphology in mammals has been quantitatively of vertebrates, containing over 5400 living species as evaluated in each group by comparative morphological well as abundant extinct species [1–4]. Living mammals analyses, including modern geometric morphometrics consist of three major clades: monotremes (order Mono- (summarized in Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Cleft Lip and Palate: the Effects on Speech and Resonance
    Cleft Lip and Palate: The Effects on Speech and Resonance Ann W. Kummer, PhD, CCC-SLP Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center ___________________________________________________________________________ Cleft lip and/or palate can have a negative impact on both speech and resonance. The following is a summary of normal anatomy, the types and causes of clefts, and the effects on speech and resonance. ______________________________________________________________________________ Normal Anatomy Nose • Columella - the column that separates the nostrils and holds up the nasal tip • Ala base - the base of the nostrils • Ala rim - the rim of the nostrils • Philtrum - the depression on the upper lip under the columella • Philtral ridges – embryological suture lines above the lip that border the philtrum Lip • Cupid’s Bow - the shape of the upper lip • White Roll - border of the red part of the lips • Vermilion - the red part of the lip Hard Palate - consists of the premaxilla, the maxilla proper and the palatine bone. • Premaxilla - triangular structure in the middle anterior portion of the palate. It is bordered by the incisive foramen and bilateral incisive structures, which extend between the lateral incisors and canines. • Palatine Process of Maxilla - horizontal plates starting at the alveolar process, and bordered by the incisive sutures and the transverse palatine suture. • Palatine Bone - horizontal plate which is bordered by the transverse palatine suture and completes the hard palate posteriorly. Velum (Soft Palate) - muscular portion of palate which is attached to the posterior edge of the palatine bone. 1 Cleft Lip and Palate 0814 1 of 4 Cleft Lip and Palate: The Effects on Speech and Resonance Ann W.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomy, Phylogeny and Diversity of the Extinct Lesser Antillean Rice Rats (Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini), with Description of a New Genus and Species
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220025547 Taxonomy, phylogeny and diversity of the extinct Lesser Antillean rice rats (Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini), with description of a new genus and species Article in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society · December 2010 DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2009.00628.x CITATIONS READS 19 154 4 authors, including: Samuel Turvey Marcelo Weksler Zoological Society of London Museu Nacional / UFRJ 83 PUBLICATIONS 1,612 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 1,421 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Marcelo Weksler letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 29 August 2016 Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2010, 160, 748–772. With 11 figures Taxonomy, phylogeny, and diversity of the extinct Lesser Antillean rice rats (Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini), with description of a new genus and species SAMUEL T. TURVEY1*, MARCELO WEKSLER2, ELAINE L. MORRIS3 and MARK NOKKERT4 1Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY, UK 2American Museum of Natural History (Division of Paleontology and Vertebrate Zoology), Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, USA 3Centre for Applied Archaeological Analyses, School of Humanities (Archaeology), University of Southampton, Avenue Campus, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK 41, The Old Rectory, Fleggburgh Road, Rollesby, Norfolk NR29 5AJ, UK Received 15 May 2009; accepted for publication 1 September 2009 Rice rats (Sigmodontinae: Oryzomyini) are abundant in the Late Quaternary fossil record and in Holocene pre-Columbian archaeological middens across the Lesser Antilles.
    [Show full text]
  • Premaxilla: an Independent Bone That Can Base Therapeutics for Middle Third Growth!
    orthodontic insight Premaxilla: an independent bone that can base therapeutics for middle third growth! Mariana Trevizan1, Alberto Consolaro2 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.22.2.021-026.oin Premaxilla, in its early descriptions, had the participation of Goethe. In our face, in a certain period of growth and devel- opment processes, premaxilla is an independent and, then, a semi-independent bone to finally be totally integrated to the maxilla. Formation of the premaxilla acts as a stabilization element inside the facial skeleton comparable to the cornerstone of a Roman arch and is closely related to the development of human face and its abnormal growth with characteristic mal- formations. Until when the premaxillary-maxillary suture remains open and offers opportunities to orthopedically influ- ence facial growth to exert influence over facial esthetics and function? Contact with preliminary results in 1183 skulls from anatomic museums at USP, Unicamp and Unifesp led us to question therapeutic perspectives and its clinical applicability. Keywords: Premaxilla. Facial growth. Incisive suture. Goethe. A descrição inicial da pré-maxila teve a participação de Goethe. Na face, em determinado período do crescimento e desen- volvimento, têm-se a pré-maxila como um osso independente e, depois, semi-independente para, finalmente, se integrar totalmente à maxila. A formação da pré-maxila atua como um elemento estabilizador dentro do esqueleto facial, comparável com a pedra angular de um arco romano, e está intimamente relacionada com o desenvolvimento da face humana e seu crescimento anormal, com malformações características. Até quando a sutura pré-maxilar-maxilar continua aberta e oferece oportunidades para se influenciar ortopedicamente o crescimento facial e modificar a estética e função da face? O contato com estudos preliminares em 1.183 crânios de museus anatômicos da USP, Unicamp e Unifesp nos induziu a questionar sobre as perspectivas terapêuticas e aplicabilidades clínicas.
    [Show full text]
  • Largest Known Mesozoic Multituberculate from Eurasia And
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Largest known Mesozoic multituberculate from Eurasia and implications for multituberculate Received: 10 July 2015 Accepted: 09 September 2015 evolution and biology Published: 22 October 2015 Li Xu1, Xingliao Zhang1, Hanyong Pu1, Songhai Jia1, Jiming Zhang1, Junchang Lü2 & Jin Meng3 A new multituberculate, Yubaartar zhongyuanensis gen. and sp. nov., is reported from the Upper Cretaceous of Luanchuan County, Henan Province, China. The holotype of the new taxon is a partial skeleton with nearly complete cranium and associated lower jaws with in situ dentitions. The new species is the southern-most record of a Late Cretaceous multituberculate from outside of the Mongolian Plateau in Asia and represents the largest known Mesozoic multituberculate from Eurasia. The new specimen displays some intriguing features previously unknown in multituberculates, such as the first evidence of replacement of the ultimate upper premolar and a unique paleopathological case in Mesozoic mammals in which the animal with a severely broken right tibia could heal and survive in natural condition. The phylogenetic analysis based on craniodental characters places Yubaartar as the immediate outgroup of Taeniolabidoidea, a group consisting of a North American clade and an Asian clade. This relationship indicates at least a faunal interchange of multituberculates before the K-Pg transition. The new evidence further supports the hypothesis that disparity in dental complexity, which relates to animal diets, increased with generic richness and disparity in body size, and that an adaptive shift towards increased herbivory across the K-Pg transitional interval. Multituberculates are extinct mammals that lived in the Mesozoic and early Cenozoic1,2, ranging from the Middle or Late Jurassic3-8 to the Late Eocene9-12.
    [Show full text]
  • Laboratory Manual for Mammalogy
    LABORATORY MANUAL FOR MAMMALOGY 1 The Skull Skull morphology provides important information for identifying mammals and understanding their biology. Familiarize yourself with the basic elements and landmarks of the mammalian skull, as exemplified in a dog or horse skull. Be sure to find the following bones and landmarks: Bones nasal frontal lacrimal parietal premaxilla squamosal maxilla occipital (supraoccipital, exoccipital, basioccipital) palatine dentary pterygoid alisphenoid jugal Landmarks narial opening infraorbital foramen orbit lacrimal foramen (secondary) palate alisphenoid canal supraorbital process foramen ovale postorbital process foramen magnum internal nares zygomatic arch glenoid (mandibular) fossa sagittal crest/temporal fossa nuchal crest occipital condyle auditory bulla mandibular symphysis coronoid process mandibular condyle angle of mandible 2 3 4 Postcranial skeleton The rest of the skeleton apart from the skull is known as the postcranial skeleton. Postcrania can be important for distinguishing different types of mammals and for understanding their locomotion. Familiarize yourself with the following bones and their indicated landmarks: Vertebrae Atlas and axis: first two cervicals Cervical: possess transverse foramina Thoracic: attached to ribs Lumbar: stout lower back vertebrae Sacral: connected to the pelvis usually fused into a single element, the sacrum Caudal: tail vertebrae Spinous process (neural spine) zygapophyses: the processes that form the joints between vertebrae ribs clavicle scapula innominate (pelvic
    [Show full text]