4.3 Review

Functional ecology and evolution of hominoid molar enamel thickness:: Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii and Pongo pygmaeus wurmbii

期刊

JOURNAL OF HUMAN EVOLUTION
卷 55, 期 1, 页码 60-74

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2007.12.005

关键词

diet; frugivory; young's modulus; fracture toughness; functional morphology

资金

  1. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  2. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0965900] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The divergent molar characteristics of Pongo troglodytes and Pongo pygmaeus provide an instructive paradigm for examining the adaptive form-function relationship between molar enamel thickness and food hardness. Although both species exhibit a categorical preference for ripe fruit over other food objects, the thick enamel and crenulated occlusal surface of Pongo molar teeth predict a diet that is more resistant to deformation (hard) and fracture (tough) than the diet of Pan. We confirm these predictions with behavioral observations of Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii and Pongo pygmaeus wurmbii in the wild and describe the mechanical properties of foods utilized during periods when preferred foods are scarce. Such fallback foods may have exerted a selective pressure on tooth evolution. particularly molar enamel thinness, which is interpreted as a functional adaptation to seasonal folivory and a derived character trait within the hominoid clade. The thick enamel and crenulated occlusal surface of Pongo molars is interpreted as a functional adaptation to the routine consumption of relatively tough and hard foods. We discuss the implications of these interpretations for inferring the diet of hominin species, which possessed varying degrees of thick molar enamel. These data, which are among the first reported for hominoid primates. fill an important empirical void for evaluating the mechanical plausibility of putative hominin food objects. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据