3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The effects of relative food item size on optimal tooth cusp sharpness during brittle food item processing

      , , ,
      Journal of The Royal Society Interface
      The Royal Society

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          High-level similarity of dentitions in carnivorans and rodents.

          The study of mammalian evolution depends greatly on understanding the evolution of teeth and the relationship of tooth shape to diet. Links between gross tooth shape, function and diet have been proposed since antiquity, stretching from Aristotle to Cuvier, Owen and Osborn. So far, however, the possibilities for exhaustive, quantitative comparisons between greatly different tooth shapes have been limited. Cat teeth and mouse teeth, for example, are fundamentally distinct in shape and structure as a result of independent evolutionary change over tens of millions of years. There is difficulty in establishing homology between their tooth components or in summarizing their tooth shapes, yet both carnivorans and rodents possess a comparable spectrum of dietary specializations from animals to plants. Here we introduce homology-free techniques to measure the phenotypic complexity of the three-dimensional shape of tooth crowns. In our geographic information systems (GIS) analysis of 441 teeth from 81 species of carnivorans and rodents, we show that the surface complexity of tooth crowns directly reflects the foods they consume. Moreover, the absolute values of dental complexity for individual dietary classes correspond between carnivorans and rodents, illustrating a high-level similarity between overall tooth shapes despite a lack of low-level similarity of specific tooth components. These results suggest that scale-independent forces have determined the high-level dental shape in lineages that are widely divergent in size, ecology and life history. This link between diet and phenotype will be useful for inferring the ecology of extinct species and illustrates the potential of fast-throughput, high-level analysis of the phenotype.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Allometric scaling in the dentition of primates and prediction of body weight from tooth size in fossils.

            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 (P44 and M11) 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. This is illustrated for Aegyptopithecus and other Eocene, Oligocene, and miocene primates. Regressions based on tooth size in generalized primates yield reasonable estimates of body weight, but much remains to be learned about tooth size and body size scaling in more restricted systematic groups and dietary guilds.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Dental enamel as a dietary indicator in mammals.

              The considerable variation in shape, size, structure and properties of the enamel cap covering mammalian teeth is a topic of great evolutionary interest. No existing theories explain how such variations might be fit for the purpose of breaking food particles down. Borrowing from engineering materials science, we use principles of fracture and deformation of solids to provide a quantitative account of how mammalian enamel may be adapted to diet. Particular attention is paid to mammals that feed on 'hard objects' such as seeds and dry fruits, the outer casings of which appear to have evolved structures with properties similar to those of enamel. These foods are important in the diets of some primates, and have been heavily implicated as a key factor in the evolutionary history of the hominin clade. As a tissue with intrinsic weakness yet exceptional durability, enamel could be especially useful as a dietary indicator for extinct taxa.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of The Royal Society Interface
                Journal of The Royal Society Interface
                The Royal Society
                1742-5689
                1742-5662
                October 01 2014
                October 15 2014
                : 11
                : 101
                : 20140965
                Article
                10.1098/rsif.2014.0965
                25320068
                3450cd90-48b8-4128-a859-f194656cfbc1
                © 2014
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article