Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 71, No. 5, 2000
Issue release date: September–October 2000
Folia Primatol 2000;71:305–322
(DOI:10.1159/000021754)

Size and Scaling in the Mandible of Living and Extinct Apes

Ravosa M.J.
Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Northwestern University Medical School and Department of Zoology, Division of Mammals, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Ill., USA

Individual Users: Register with Karger Login Information

Please create your User ID & Password





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.

To view the fulltext, please log in

To view the pdf, please log in

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to fill a gap in our knowledge of dietary and allometric determinants of masticatory function and mandibular morphology in major catarrhine clades. To extend the implications of previous work on variation in mandibular form and function in other primates, a scaling analysis was performed on 20 extinct and 7 living non-cercopithecoid catarrhines or ‘dental apes’. Results of allometric comparisons indicate that for a given jaw length, larger apes exhibit significantly more robust corpora and symphyses than smaller forms. This appears linked to size-related increases in dietary toughness and/or hardness, which in turn causes elevated mandibular loads and/or greater repetitive loading during unilateral mastication. Larger-bodied dental apes also display more curved symphyses, which also explains the positive allometry of symphysis width and height. In apes, proconsulids often evince more robust jaws while all hylobatids, Pan and Dryopithecus laietanus possess more gracile cross sections. In propliopithecids, Aegyptopithecus is always more robust than Propliopithecus. In proconsulids, Rangwapithecus and Micropithecus commonly exhibit more robust jaws whereas Dendropithecus and especially Simiolus are more gracile. Most of the larger taxa are folivorous and/or hard-object frugivorous pongids with relatively larger dentaries. Though apes have relatively wider corpora than cercopithecines due to greater axial twisting of the corpora during chewing, they are otherwise alike in robusticity levels. Smaller apes are similar to cercopithecines in evincing a relatively high degree of symphyseal curvature, while larger taxa are like colobines in having less curvature. Larger pongids resemble or even exceed colobine jaw proportions and thus appear to converge on colobines in terms of the mechanical properties of their diets.

Copyright © 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel



Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

References

  1. Begun DR, Ward CV, Rose MD: Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils: Miocene Hominoid Evolution and Adaptations. New York, Plenum Press, 1997.
  2. Kinzey WG: Ceboid models for the evolution of the hominoid dentition. J Hum Evol 1974;3:191–203.
  3. Kay RF: The functional adaptations of primate molar teeth. Am J Phys Anthropol 1975;43:195–215.
  4. Kay RF: Diets of early Miocene African hominoids. Nature 1977;268:628–630.
  5. Kay RF, Simons EL: The ecology of Oligocene African Anthropoidea. Int J Primatol 1980;1:21–37.
  6. Andrews P, Martin L: Hominoid dietary evolution. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1991;334:199–209.
  7. Andrews P: Evolution and environment in the Hominoidea. Nature 1992;360:641–646.
  8. Ungar PS, Kay RF: The dietary adaptations of European Miocene catarrhines. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1995;92:5479–5481.

    External Resources

  9. Teaford MF, Maas MC, Simons EL: Dental microwear and microstructure in Early Oligocene primates from the Fayum, Egypt: Implications for diet. Am J Phys Anthropol 1996;101:527–543.
  10. Ungar PS: Dental microwear of European Miocene catarrhines: Evidence for diets and tooth use. J Hum Evol 1996;31:335–366.
  11. Kay RF, Ungar PS: Dental evidence for diet in some Miocene catarrhines with comments on the effects of phylogeny on the interpretation of adaptations; in Begun DR, Ward CV, Rose MD (eds): Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils: Miocene Hominoid Evolution and Adaptations. New York, Plenum Press, 1997, pp 131–151.
  12. Begun DR, Kordos L: Phyletic affinities and functional convergence in Dryopithecus and other Miocene and living hominoids; in Begun DR, Ward CV, Rose MD (eds): Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils: Miocene Hominoid Evolution and Adaptations. New York, Plenum Press, 1997, pp 291–316.
  13. Fleagle JG: Primate Adaptation and Evolution, ed 2. New York, Academic Press, 1999.
  14. Beecher RM: Evolution of the mandibular symphysis in Notharctinae (Adapidae, Primates). Int J Primatol 1983;4:99–112.
  15. Hylander WL: Implications of in vivo experiments for interpreting the functional significance of ‘robust’ australopithecine jaws; in Grine FE (ed): Evolutionary History of the ‘Robust’ Australopithecines. New York, Aldine de Gruyter, 1988, pp 55–83.
  16. Daegling DJ: Biomechanics of cross-sectional size and shape in the hominoid mandibular corpus. Am J Phys Anthropol 1989;80:91–106.

    External Resources

  17. Daegling DJ: Functional morphology of the human chin. Evol Anthropol 1993;1:170–177.
  18. Daegling DJ, Grine FE: Compact bone distribution and biomechanics of early hominid mandibles. Am J Phys Anthropol 1991;86:321–339.
  19. Ravosa MJ: Structural allometry of the mandibular corpus and symphysis in prosimian primates. J Hum Evol 1991;20:3–20.
  20. Ravosa MJ: Allometry and heterochrony in extant and extinct Malagasy primates. J Hum Evol 1992;23:197–217.
  21. Ravosa MJ, Hylander WL: Function and fusion of the mandibular symphysis in primates: Stiffness or strength?; in Fleagle JG, Kay RF (eds): Anthropoid Origins. New York, Plenum Press, 1994, pp 447–468.
  22. Ravosa MJ, Simons EL: Mandibular growth and function in Archaeolemur. Am J Phys Anthropol 1994;95:63–76.
  23. Ravosa MJ: Mandibular form and function in North American and European Adapidae and Omomyidae. J Morphol 1996;229:171–190.
  24. Ravosa MJ: Jaw morphology and function in living and fossil Old World monkeys. Int J Primatol 1996;17:909–932.
  25. Schwartz GT, Conroy GC: Cross-sectional geometric properties of the Otavipithecus mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol 1996;99:613–623.
  26. Ravosa MJ: Anthropoid origins and the modern symphysis. Folia Primatol 1999;70:65–78.
  27. Brown B: Miocene hominoid mandibles: Functional and phylogenetic perspectives; in Begun DR, Ward CV, Rose MD (eds): Function, Phylogeny, and Fossils: Miocene Hominoid Evolution and Adaptations. New York, Plenum Press, 1997, pp 153–171.
  28. Hylander WL: In vivo bone strain in the mandible of Galago crassicaudatus. Am J Phys Anthropol 1977;46:309–326.

    External Resources

  29. Hylander WL: Mandibular function in Galago crassicaudatus and Macaca fascicularis: An in vivo approach to stress analysis of the mandible. J Morphol 1979;159:253–296.
  30. Hylander WL: The functional significance of primate mandibular form. J Morphol 1979;160:223–240.
  31. Hylander WL: Patterns of stress and strain in the macaque mandible; in Carlson DS (ed): Craniofacial Biology. Monograph 10, Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1981, pp 1–37.
  32. Hylander WL: Stress and strain in the mandibular symphysis of primates: A test of competing hypotheses. Am J Phys Anthropol 1984;64:1–46.
  33. Hylander WL, Johnson KR, Crompton AW: Loading patterns and jaw movements during mastication in Macaca fascicularis: A bone-strain, electromyographic and cineradiographic analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 1987;72:287–314.

    External Resources

  34. Hylander WL, Ravosa MJ, Ross CF, Johnson KR: Mandibular corpus strain in primates: Further evidence for a functional link between symphyseal fusion and jaw-adductor muscle force. Am J Phys Anthropol 1998;107:257–271.
  35. Hylander WL, Ravosa MJ, Ross CF, Wall CE, Johnson KR: Symphyseal fusion and jaw-adductor muscle force: An EMG study. Am J Phys Anthropol 2000;112: in press.
  36. Ravosa MJ: Experimental analysis of masticatory function in capuchin monkeys. Am J Phys Anthropol Suppl 1996;22:194.
  37. Hylander WL: Mandibular function and biomechanical stress and scaling. Am Zool 1985;25:315–330.
  38. Hylander WL, Johnson KR: Jaw muscle function and wishboning of the mandible during mastication in macaques and baboons. Am J Phys Anthropol 1994;94:523–547.
  39. Vinyard CJ, Ravosa MJ: Ontogeny, function, and scaling of the mandibular symphysis in papionin primates. J Morphol 1998;235:157–175.
  40. Shea BT: Size and diet in the evolution of African ape craniodental form. Folia Primatol 1983;40:32–68.

    External Resources

  41. Ravosa MJ: The ontogeny of cranial sexual dimorphism in two Old World monkeys: Macaca fascicularis (Cercopithecinae) and Nasalis larvatus (Colobinae). Int J Primatol 1991;12:403–426.
  42. Ravosa MJ, Ross CF: Craniodental allometry and heterochrony in two howler monkeys: Alouatta seniculus and A. palliata. Am J Primatol 1994;33:277–299.
  43. Taylor AB: Masticatory form and diet in western lowland (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and eastern lowland (G. g. graueri) gorillas. Am J Phys Anthropol Suppl 1999;28:262–263.
  44. Ravosa MJ, Vinyard CJ, Gagnon M, Islam SA: Evolution of anthropoid jaw loading and kinematic patterns. Am J Phys Anthropol 2000;112:493–516.
  45. Luschei ES, Goodwin GM: Patterns of mandibular movement and jaw muscle activity during mastication in monkeys. J Neurophysiol 1974;37:954–966.

    External Resources

  46. Hylander WL, Johnson KR: Temporalis and masseter function during incision in humans and macaques. Int J Primatol 1985;6:289–322.
  47. Hylander WL, Johnson KR, Crompton AW: Muscle force recruitment and biomechanical modeling: An analysis of masseter muscle function during mastication in Macaca fascicularis. Am J Phys Anthropol 1992;88:365–387.
  48. Bouvier M, Hylander WL: Effect of bone strain on cortical bone structure in macaques (Macaca mulatta). J Morphol 1981;167:1–12.

    External Resources

  49. Demes B, Preuschoft H, Wolff, JEA: Stress-strength relationships in the mandibles of hominoids; in Chivers DJ, Wood BA, Bilsborough A (eds): Food Acquisition and Processing in Primates. New York, Plenum Press, 1984, pp 369–390.
  50. Bouvier M: A biomechanical analysis of mandibular scaling in Old World monkeys. Am J Phys Anthropol 1986;69:473–482.
  51. Bouvier M: Biomechanical scaling of mandibular dimensions in New World monkeys. Int J Primatol 1986;7:551–567.
  52. Daegling DJ: Mandibular morphology and diet in the genus Cebus. Int J Primatol 1992;13:545–570.
  53. Daegling DJ, Ravosa MJ, Johnson KR, Hylander WL: Influence of teeth, alveoli, and periodontal ligaments on torsional rigidity in human mandibles. Am J Phys Anthropol 1992;89:59–72.
  54. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ: Biometry. New York, Freeman, 1981.
  55. Biknevicius AR, Ruff CB: The structure of the mandibular corpus and its relationship to feeding behaviours in extant carnivorans. J Zool 1992;228:479–507.
  56. Ravosa MJ: Jaw scaling and biomechanics in fossil taxa. J Hum Evol 1996;30:159–160.
  57. Sailer LD, Gaulin SJC, Boster JS, Kurland JA: Measuring the relationship between dietary quality and body size in primates. Primates 1985;26:14–27.
  58. DuBrul EL: Early hominid feeding mechanisms. Am J Phys Anthropol 1977;47:305–320.

    External Resources

  59. Cole TM: Postnatal heterochrony of the masticatory apparatus in Cebus apella and Cebus albifrons. J Hum Evol 1992;23:253–282.
  60. Takahashi LK, Pan R: Mandibular morphometrics among macaques: The case of Macaca thibetana. Int J Primatol 1994;15:597–621.
  61. Pan R, Peng Y, Ye Z, Wang H, Yu F: Comparison of masticatory morphology between Rhinopithecus bieti and R. roxellana. Am J Primatol 1995;35:271–281.
  62. Antón SC: Cranial adaptation to a high attrition diet in Japanese macaques. Int J Primatol 1996;17:401–427.


Pay-per-View Options
Direct payment This item at the regular price: USD 38.00
Payment from account With a Karger Pay-per-View account (down payment USD 150) you profit from a special rate for this and other single items.
This item at the discounted price: USD 26.50